ARTICLE IN PRESS

Thin-Walled Structures 47 (2009) 1363–1372

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Thin-Walled Structures
journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/tws

Finite element analysis of thin-walled composite laminated beams with

geometrically nonlinear behavior including warping deformation
J.E. Barradas Cardoso a,, Nuno M.B. Benedito b, Anı́bal J.J. Valido b
a
Instituto Superior Técnico, Departamento de Engenharia Mecânica, Av. Rovisco Pais, 1049-001 Lisboa, Portugal
b
Escola Superior de Tecnologia, Instituto Politécnico de Setúbal, Campus do IPS, Estefanilha, 2914-508 Setúbal, Portugal

a r t i c l e in fo abstract

Article history: A finite element model for structural analysis of composite laminated thin-walled beam structures, with
Received 7 December 2007 geometrically nonlinear behavior, including torsion warping deformation, is presented. A general
Received in revised form continuum formulation considering the updated Lagrangean procedure and a generalized displacement
14 July 2008
control method, are used to describe the deformation of the structure. The beam cross-section geometry
Accepted 11 March 2009
is discretized by quadratic isoparametric finite elements to determine its bending-torsion properties.
Available online 27 May 2009
The structural discretization is performed throughout three-dimensional two-node Hermitean finite
Keywords: beam elements, with seven degrees-of-freedom per node. Several applications are presented,
Thin-walled beams addressing the influence of lamina orientation on the structural behavior.
Composites
& 2009 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
Nonlinear structures
Finite elements

1. Introduction Thin-walled beams made of isotropic materials have been

studied by many authors [1–16]. Some works have been devoted
The demanding for more economic structures is generally to the analysis of the flexural-torsion properties of thin-walled
translated in the production of lighter structures and it has composite beams [17–19]. In [20,21], closed-form solutions for
brought up the needs of the utilization of composite materials and solid and thin-walled composite beams were presented.
the consideration of large structural deformations. Today, the use Vlasov’s theory was extended for the bending and twisting of
of composite materials is generalized to a large variety of thin-walled composite beams with open cross-section made from
structures due to their good strength/weight and stiffness/weight symmetric fiber-reinforced laminates [22,23] and for composite
ratios when compared to conventional materials. beams with arbitrary geometric and material sectional properties
Thin-walled beams are also applied to various structures, due [24,25]. A geometrically nonlinear theory for composite thin-
to their large axial stiffness and large bending stiffness associated walled beams accounting for finite flexural displacements and
to a small weight. These features may be reinforced if composite arbitrarily large twist angle has been presented in [26]. In [27], an
materials are used in the beam construction. Since thin-walled analytical model to the analysis of flexural, torsion and flexural-
beams are slender, stability problems should be considered in torsion buckling of a thin-walled I-section composite beam
their design. On the other hand, in the case of thin-walled open subject to axial load is developed. The bending-torsion behavior
cross-sections, the torsion stiffness is lower and the warping of thin-walled composite beams has also been studied in [28–31].
effects may be relevant. In [25,32,33], thin-walled composite beams based on the varia-
In a standard finite element analysis of stiffened plate and shell tional asymptotical beam sectional (VABS) approach had been
structures it is necessary of a large number of degrees-of-freedom in studied. This approach is used to rigorously split the geometrically
discretizing them. Alternatively, some of these structures may be nonlinear three-dimensional (3D) elasticity problem into a linear
analyzed by a two-phase strategy: (i) finite element analysis of 2D cross-section analysis and a nonlinear 1D beam analysis,
cross-section geometry to determine the bending and torsion instead of invoking ad hoc kinematic assumptions. In [34], an
properties of the structure as a beam; and (ii) finite element analysis improved stability theory for the spatially coupled stability
of the structure based on a general thin-walled beam theory. analysis of thin-walled composite beams with arbitrary lamina-
tion is derived, and a numerical method evaluates the exact
element stiffness matrix. In [35,36,38,39], the influence of
 Corresponding author. Tel.: +351 218417725. transverse and torsion shear deformation on buckling loads of
E-mail addresses: [email protected] (J.E.B. Cardoso), composite beams is studied. In [37], the study of this influence is
[email protected] (A.J.J. Valido). extended for post-buckling analysis.

0263-8231/$ - see front matter & 2009 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
doi:10.1016/j.tws.2009.03.002
 ARTICLE IN PRESS
1364 J.E.B. Cardoso et al. / Thin-Walled Structures 47 (2009) 1363–1372

The present work presents a finite element model for structural (3) the shearing deformation of the middle surface is zero in each
analysis of composite laminated thin-walled beam structures, with panel;
geometrically nonlinear behavior, including post-critical behavior (4) each panel behaves as a thin plate. This implies that the
and warping deformation. To achieve this goal, an updated Kirchoff hypothesis is valid for each plate element;
Lagrangean description for the nonlinear structural deformation is (5) each laminated panel is symmetric and balanced;
used, and the structural analysis is performed by a displacement- (6) the strains are small but large displacements and rotations are
controlled continuation method [40]. This method has been used allowed; and
successfully by the authors for nonlinear analysis of beam structures (7) the effect of the shear deformation due torsion and bending is
as well as truss structures, including post-critical behavior [41–43]. negligible.
In this paper, the thin-walled beams are composed by composite flat
panels with symmetric and balanced stacking sequences. The cross-
section bending-torsion properties are integrals based on the cross-
section geometry, on the warping function and on the individual 3. Nonlinear structural analysis
stiffness of the panels that constitute the cross-section, which
depend by their side on the laminate configuration and lamina Using the updated Lagrangean formulation to describe the
material distribution. Though the laminates present symmetric and motion of the continuum [44], and matrix and tensor notations,
balanced stacking sequences, these sequences may change in we get the linearized incremental virtual work equation at the
different laminates, i.e., the cross-section thin walls can have load level t as
different lay-up distributions provided they keep symmetry and Z Z Z
t t 0 t
balance. The cross-section geometry is discretized by quadratic ðt S  dt L þ t r  dt N Þ d V ¼ t f  dud V þ t T  dud GT (1)
isoparametric finite elements to determine its bending-torsion
properties [18]. The structural discretization is formulated through- and the incremental constitutive law
out three-dimensional two-node Hermitean finite beam elements.
tS ¼ Et e (2)
Numerical examples are performed on open cross-section beams,
0
where the structural behavior and particularly the critical load where tS, f, u and tT are, respectively, the stress, body force,
magnitude related to the lamina orientation are investigated. displacement and prescribed surface traction increments, tr is the
Cauchy stress measure, E is the tangent constitutive tensor, and
the Green-Lagrange strain tensor increment is given as
2. Model assumptions t e ¼ t eL þ t eN ; t eL ¼ t bðuT Þ; t eN ¼ 12t ZðuT ; uT Þ (3)
with tb and tg operators defined as
The present work addresses to straight thin-walled composite
beams of arbitrary cross-section with geometrically nonlinear 1 n   T    T  t T  T o
t bðÞ ¼ t r ðÞ þ t r ðÞ þ t r ðÞ t r t uT þ tr u t r ðÞ
behavior. 2
The beams are made from an assembly of thin flat-layered 1 n  T   T o
t Zða; bÞ ¼ t r ðaÞ t r ðbÞ þ t r ðbÞ t r ðaÞ (4)
panels, each panel corresponding to a laminate (Fig. 1). A beam 2
referential system (x, y, z) for the member geometry and cross- In the foregoing equations tu is the displacement field at the
section properties for which the y and z axes lie in the plane of the load level t, r ¼ (@/@y, @/@z), is the space gradient operator, d refers
cross-section and the x-axis is parallel to the longitudinal axis of to arbitrary variation of the state fields and ‘  ’ refers to the
the beam, a local panel coordinate system (x, n, s), wherein the n- standard tensor product. The left superscript and the left
axis is normal to the middle surface of a panel and the s-axis is subscript, stand respectively for the configurations where the
directed along the cross-section contour middle line, and a quantities are measured and referred to. If the configurations
material axes system (1, 2) for each ply, are used. The point (ys, where the quantities are measured and referred to are the same,
zs) define the location of the shear center with respect to the only the superscript is used.
elastic center. To define the load–deflection path, a generalized displacement
The following assumptions are adopted: control method [40] has been implemented.

(1) the contour does not deform in its own plane;

(2) the warping function is dependent on the material arrange- 4. Cross-section analysis
ment of the laminates;
By using a thin-walled beam theory, the points of the cross-
section have three properties: their coordinates (y, z) on the plane
Laminate i
of the section and a warping function that depends on those
coordinates o(y, z). In the case of thin-walled beams made of thin
si ni n y, v0 flat laminated panels, the properties of the corresponding laminate
xi at each point have also to be considered. These distributed point
s x properties are integrated over the cross-section area, giving the
t 2
S ys following cross-section bending-torsion-independent properties
1 Z Z Z
E EA ¼ En dA; ESy ¼ En z dA; ESz ¼ En y dA;
y z, w0 zs Z Z Z
EIyy ¼ En z2 dA; EIyz ¼ En yz dA; EIzz ¼ En y2 dA;
z x, u0 Z Z Z
s
EJo ¼ En o dA; EJyo ¼ En yo dA; EJ zo ¼ En zo dA;
x Z
EJ oo ¼ En o2 dA (5)
Fig. 1. Thin-walled composite beam coordinate systems.
 ARTICLE IN PRESS
J.E.B. Cardoso et al. / Thin-Walled Structures 47 (2009) 1363–1372 1365

where commas stand for partial derivatives. If the coordinates y For numerical implementation of the Eq. (13), the cross-section
and z are central and the warping function is referred to the shear geometry is discretized with quadratic isoparametric finite
center and normalized, then elements. The authors’ code is used to solve in a generalized
form, the warping function and the bending-torsion properties of
ESy ¼ ESz ¼ EJo ¼ EJ yo ¼ EJ zo ¼ 0 (6) either solid, either thin-walled open or closed composite cross-
From the properties presented in Eq. (5), let us distinguish the sections. It extends the code implemented in [6,7] for isotropic
warping property EJoo, as an independent property, the combina- materials.
tion of others to define the St. Venant torsion stiffness as
Z   Z
5. Beam element model
GJ ¼ Gn ȳ2 þ z̄2 þ ȳo;z  z̄o;y dA ¼ Gn ðr̄  roÞ  r̄dA
Z Z
  The structural discretization is formulated throughout three-
¼ Gn y2 þ z2 þ yō;z  zō;y dA ¼ Gn ðr  rōÞ  rdA (7)
dimensional two-node Hermitean finite beam elements with
where o and ō are the warping functions referred, respectively, to seven degrees-of-freedom per node. To uncouple the governing
the shear and elastic centers and equations for torsion and flexure, two reference lines are used: the
centroidal axis (line of elastic centers E) for stretching and
r̄ ¼ r  r S ¼ ðȳ; z̄Þ; ȳ ¼ y  yS ; z̄ ¼ z  zS (8) bending components, and the line of shear centers S for shear,
where r ¼ (z, y) is a vector of coordinates with respect to the twisting and warping components (Fig. 2). The incremental
elastic center. vectors of nodal displacements and nodal forces are, respectively,
The location of the elastic center is given as
U ¼ f u1 v1 w1 yx1 yy1 yz1 y0 x1 u2 v2 w2 yx2 yy2 yz2 y0 x2 gT
ESz ESy
yE ¼ ; zE ¼ (9) (14)
EA EA
and the location of the shear center is given as and

EIzz EJ zo  EIyz EJ yo EIyy EJ yo  EIyz EJzo F ¼ f F x1 F y1 F z1 M x1 M y1 M z1 B1 F x2 F y2 F z2 M x2 M y2 M z2 B2 g T

yS ¼  2
; zS ¼ 2
(10)
EIyy EIzz  EIyz EIyy EIzz  EIyz (15)
We may note the warping properties EJ yo and EJ zo in Eq. (10) to
In Eq. (14), uk, vk and wk are the element k-node incremental
determine the position of the shear center, are dependent on the
displacement components of the elastic center, respectively, in the
warping function referred to the elastic center.
x, y and z directions; yxk, yyk and yzk, are the element k-node
In the determination of the bending cross-section properties,
incremental rotations about x, y and z axis, respectively; and the
the equivalent membrane longitudinal modulus Exm is used, since
right upper coma stands for the derivative with respect to x. In Eq.
for thin-walled beams the normal stresses due to bending
(15), Fxk, Fyk and Fzk are the element k-node incremental force
correspond essentially to a membrane effect in the laminate.
components, respectively, in the x, y and z directions; Mxk, Myk and
According to the classical torsion theory of isotropic thin-walled
Mzk are the element k-node incremental moments around x-, y-
open cross-section beams, the shear stresses within the element
and z-axis, respectively; and Bk is the incremental bimoment at
thickness varies linearly from a positive to a negative value at the
the node k of the element.
surfaces and zero at the mid-plane. In this case, the applied
With reference to Fig. 1, the incremental displacement of any
torsion moment is resisted by an equilibrating system of
point of the cross-section is given by
distributed moments in the panels, representing a bending mode
of response. Hence, to calculate the torsion properties of the open
ux ðx; y; zÞ ¼ uðxÞ  yyz ðxÞ þ zyy ðxÞ þ oðy; zÞwðxÞ
parts of the cross-section, the corresponding shear modulus value
should be the bending equivalent value Gxsb. For closed cross- uy ðx; y; zÞ ¼ vðxÞ  ðz  zS Þyx ðxÞ
sections, the stress distribution is assumed constant throughout uz ðx; y; zÞ ¼ wðxÞ þ ðy  yS Þyx ðxÞ (16)
the element thickness, corresponding to a membrane mode of
response. So, to calculate the torsion properties of the closed parts
where w represents the intensity of warping. Assuming the effect
of the cross-section, we must use the membrane equivalent shear
of the shear deformation due torsion and bending is negligible,
modulus Gxsm. For a symmetric laminate, these equivalent
thus
modules are given as
1 12 1 w ¼ yx;x ¼ dyx =dx and yy ¼ wS;x ¼ dwS =dx; yz ¼ vS;x
En  Em
x ¼ ; Gn  Gbxs ¼ 3 or Gn  Gm
xs ¼ (11)
ta11 t d66 ta66 ¼ dvS =dx (17)
where t is the laminate thickness, and the compliance coefficients
aij and dij are obtained by inverting the laminate constitutive
The beam Green strain measure at load level t can be given by
equations. The superscripts m and b indicate the membrane and
the vector
bending modes, respectively [45].
To determine the warping function o(y, z), one uses the stress n oT
Þ

t
variational equilibrium equation
t
 ¼ xx 2t xy 2t xz (18)
Z
ðsxy;y þ sxz;z Þdo dA ¼ 0 (12)
and its increment is given by the Eqs. (3) and (4) as
that after integration and substitution of the stress displacement 8 9 8 9 8 9
relations of elasticity for torsion leads to < t xx >
> < t exx >
= > = >
Z =
< t xx >
Z Z ^ ¼t e^ L þt e^ N  2t xy ¼ t exy þ t Zxy
te (19)
dP  Gn ro  rddA  Gn r̄  rdodA ¼ 0 (13) >
:2  > ; >
: e > ; >
: Z > ;
t xz t xz t xz
 ARTICLE IN PRESS
1366 J.E.B. Cardoso et al. / Thin-Walled Structures 47 (2009) 1363–1372

y y
'x1 tB1
y1

x1 tM t
Mx tF
v1 y1 1 y1
z1 tF
u1 w1 x1 tF
S1 z1
S1
E1 E1
tM
z z1
z
y2
t
My
v2 z2 2 t
Fy2
w2
t
Fz
2

E2 S2 x2 t
Mx
E2 S2 2

u2 'x2 t
B2
t t
Mz Fx
2 2

x x
Fig. 2. Nodal displacements and nodal forces for the beam element.

20
y

A B F z

100
Fz = 0.001F E 43.8

2000
y 6.2
40
z x

Fig. 3. Cantilever beam, cross-section geometry and finite element mesh.

where where E* ¼ Exm and G* ¼ Gxsm (if the point belongs to the closed
" part of the cross-section) or G* ¼ Gxsb (if the point belongs to the
@ux @ux @t ux @uy @t uy @uz @t uz 1 @ux 2 cross-section open part), are the equivalent laminate modulus
t xx ¼ þ þ þ þ
@x @x @x @x @x @x @x 2 @x defined in Section 3.
 2  2 # Using the finite element modeling, it is adopted a linear
@uy @uz
þ þ displacement field for u(x) and a cubic displacement field for the
@x @x
other generalized displacements. Then, the Eq. (1) of incremental
@ux @uy virtual work becomes
2t xy ¼ þ
@y @x
@ux @t ux @t ux @ux @uy @t uy @t uy @uy @uz @t uz ðt K L þ t K NL ÞU ¼ t P (22)
þ þ þ þ þ t t
@x @y @x @y @x @y @x @y @x @y where KL and KNL are, respectively, the linear and the nonlinear
t

@ uz @uz @ux @ux @uy @uy @uz @uz (or geometric) parts of the; tangent stiffness matrix at load level t,
þ þ þ þ
@x @y @x @y @x @y @x @y tP is the incremental vector of external forces and U is the
@ux @w incremental nodal displacement vector.
2t xz ¼ þ
@z @x
@ux @t ux @t ux @ux @uy @t uy @t uy @uy @uz @t uz
þ þ þ þ þ 6. Numerical examples
@x @z @x @z @x @z @x @z @x @z
t

@ uz @uz @ux @ux @uy @uy @uz @uz
þ þ þ þ (20) 6.1. Thin-walled asymmetric cross-section cantilever beam
@x @z @x @z @x @z @x @z

The increments of the stress components are obtained, A thin-walled asymmetrical channel-section cantilever beam
considering the linear part of the strain incremental vector in shown in Fig. 3 is considered. To calculate the bending-torsion
Eq. (2), as cross-section properties, the cross-section is discretized by 36
8 9 2  38 9 eight node quadratic isoparametric finite elements. The beam is
< t Sxx >
> = E 0 0 > < t exx >
= discretized by eight finite elements of equal length.
6 7
t Sxy ¼ 4 0 G 0 5 t exy (21)
>
: S ; > >
: e > ; In a first case, an isotropic section of thickness t ¼ 5 mm is
t xz 0 0 G t xz considered. The material is given by E ¼ 300 MPa and G ¼ 115
 ARTICLE IN PRESS
J.E.B. Cardoso et al. / Thin-Walled Structures 47 (2009) 1363–1372 1367

MPa. The location of the shear center was calculated as observe the agreement between this value and the calculated
yS ¼ 26.3 mm and zS ¼ 12.8 mm. As the cross-section is value. In [46], the curve F=F cr  yxB was calculated for the same
asymmetric, the column instability will occur in a flexural-torsion beam. We may observe the agreement between its trajectory in
mode. The critical load was evaluated and compared with the [46] and the trajectory shown in Fig. 4.
theoretical one given by [8] In a second case the same structure was considered, but with
! the cross-section formed by three equal laminates with eight
p2 EIyy p2 EIzz A p2 EIoo layers [y/y/y/y]S and total thickness t ¼ 1 mm. The material
Fy ¼ ; Fz ¼ ; Fy ¼ GJ þ (23)
K 2y L2 K 2z L2 Ips K 2y L2 properties are E1 ¼ 140 GPa, E2 ¼ 10 GPa, n12 ¼ 0.3 and G12 ¼ 5
GPa.
The Fig. 4 shows the load–deflection curves, where the Considering the laminate configuration [45/45/45/45]S and
theoretical value Fcr ¼ 14.02 N has been considered. One may a negative perturbation force as indicated in Fig. 5, the critical

Fig. 4. Load vs. displacement curves for asymmetrical channel-section isotropic cantilever beam: (a) F=F cr  yxB , (b) F/FcrwB/L and (c) F/FcrvB/L.

180
A B F 150
Fz = 0.001F 120
F [N]

90
2000 60
y
30
0
z x -0.5 -0.4 -0.3 -0.2 -0.1 0.0
θx_B [rad]

Fig. 5. Negative perturbation force and load vs. twisting curve for asymmetrical channel cross-section composite cantilever beam.

Fz = 0.001F 180
F 150
A B 120
F [N]

90
2000 60
y 30
0
0.00 0.05 0.10 0.15 0.20 0.25
z x
θx_B [rad]

Fig. 6. Positive perturbation force and load vs. twisting curve for asymmetrical channel cross-section composite cantilever beam.
 ARTICLE IN PRESS
1368 J.E.B. Cardoso et al. / Thin-Walled Structures 47 (2009) 1363–1372

load obtained is Fcr ¼ 147.79 N. The load vs. twisting curve, F  yxB , The influence of the lamina orientation on the critical load was
is also presented in Fig. 5. also investigated. The Fig. 8 shows the variation of the critical load
Considering a positive perturbation force, the critical load and the variation of the laminate equivalent membrane
obtained is 149.87 N. This case is represented in Fig. 6. Comparing longitudinal modulus with the lamina orientation. The critical
the load vs. twisting curves of Figs. 5 and 6, we observe the post- load variation follows nearly the same trajectory as the variation
critical behavior of the beam is quite different. of the laminate equivalent membrane modulus. This may indicate
The linear critical buckling load was also obtained by the mode corresponding to the critical load is essentially a flexural
eigenvalue analysis using ANSYS code, as Fcr ¼ 147.24 N, where mode.
the same beam was meshed by 800 laminated shell elements
(SHELL99). The Fig. 7 shows the correspondent buckling mode. We
may note that the beam tip twisting rotation is positive, so this 6.2. Channel cross-section cantilever beam
critical load value should be compared with the one obtained
when a positive perturbation force was considered. This problem is concerned with the bending and twisting of
the channel-section cantilever beam shown is Fig. 9. The beam is
subject to a transverse force Fz applied at the elastic center of the
free end. To calculate the bending-torsion cross-section
1 properties, the cross-section is discretized by 44 eight node
DISPLACEMENT
STEP = 1 JUL 7 2006 quadratic isoparametric finite elements. The beam is discretized
SUB = 1 15:24:41 by eight finite elements of equal length.
FREQ = 147.242 Two laminates identified in the Fig. 9 as 1 and 2, with four
DMX = 1.405
layers [y/y]S and total thickness t ¼ 3 mm, forms the cross-
section. The material properties E1 ¼ 48.3 GPa, E2 ¼ 19.8 GPa,
Z n12 ¼ 0.27, G12 ¼ 8.96 GPa, corresponding to S2-glass/epoxy are
used. Two material architectures are considered: a unidirectional
01 lay-up and an angle-ply lay-up [45/45]s. Four cases corre-
sponding to combinations of these two material architectures are
considered, as indicated in Table 1. The elastic center location d,
the shear center location ys, the torsion stiffness value GJ and the
warping property value EJ oo are also presented in the Table 1. Due
to application of the force Fz, the beam undergoes bending in the
plane zx, coupled bending–twisting. Fig. 10 shows the free end
curves load vs. twisting for each case.
We may observe that the unidirectional lay-up in web and
C assimetrico composito (eigenbuckling analysis)
flanges (case 1) leads to the smaller torsion stiffness and to the
Fig. 7. Buckling mode obtained by eigenvalue analysis using ANSYS for largest warping property; otherwise, the angle-ply lay-up in both
asymmetrical channel cross-section composite cantilever beam. web and flanges (case 2) has the opposite effect. Comparing to the

160
600 140
Critical Load [N]

500 120
Ex_m [GPa]

400 100
300 80
60
200
40
100 20
0 0
0 15 30 45 60 75 90 0 15 30 45 60 75 90
Lamina orientation [°] Lamina orientation [°]

Fig. 8. Critical load vs. lamina orientation and laminate equivalent membrane longitudinal modulus vs. lamina orientation for asymmetrical channel cross-section
composite cantilever beam.

ys
Fz
1
2
A y
50

E
B S
1
2000 t=3
z y d
50
x

Fig. 9. Channel cross-section cantilever beam.

 ARTICLE IN PRESS
J.E.B. Cardoso et al. / Thin-Walled Structures 47 (2009) 1363–1372 1369

unidirectional lay-up (case 1), the cross-section torsion stiffness determined. Two laminates identified in the figures as 1 and 2,
and warping property are more affected by the lamina orientation with eight layers [y/y/y/y]S and total thickness t ¼ 2 mm, form
of laminate 1 (case 4) than by the lamina orientation of the the cross-section. The material properties are E1 ¼ 140 GPa,
laminate 2 (case 3). The twisting rotation reaches the greater E2 ¼ 10 GPa, n12 ¼ 0.3, G12 ¼ 5 GPa.
value in the case 1 and the smaller value in the case 4. However, To calculate the bending-torsion cross-section properties, the
we may note that in the case 4 the torsion moment is smaller than cross-section is discretized by 44 eight node quadratic isopara-
in the other cases, since the elastic center and the shear center are metric finite elements. The beam is discretized by eight hermitean
closer. two-node beam finite elements of equal length.
In a first case, for a cantilever beam, to determine the critical
load corresponding the bending mode, a lateral perturbation force
6.3. Thin-walled cruciform cross-section beam Fy ¼ 0.001F is considered (Fig. 11). Considering the configuration
of both laminates as [45/45/45/45]S, the theoretical value of
In this example, the critical loads corresponding to flexural and the critical load obtained using the Eq. (23), where Kz is the
torsion instability modes of the cruciform cross-section beam are equivalency factor related to the Euler column, is Fcr ¼ 394.67 N.

Table 1
Results for the channel cross-section cantilever beam.
2.0
Case Laminates lay-up d (mm) ys (mm) GJ (N mm2) EJ oo (N mm4)

1 1-[01/01]s 32.18 37.01 0.11598E+8 0.21899E+13 1.5

2-[01/01]s

F/Fcr
2 1-[451/451]s 32.18 37.01 0.17216E+8 0.11275E+13
1.0
2-[451/451]s

3 1-[01/01]s 29.34 41.05 0.13342E+8 0.19628E+13

2-[451/451]s 0.5
4 1-[451/451]s 35.83 31.37 0.15432E+8 0.13214E+13
2-[01/01]s 0.0
-1.0 -0.8 -0.6 -0.4 -0.2 0.0
VB/L

Fig. 12. Load vs. displacement curve for the cruciform cross-section cantilever
beam corresponding to the bending mode.

3500
3000
2500
Fcr [N]

2000
Laminate 1 (Laminate 2 at 0°)
1500 Laminate 2 (Laminate 1 at 0°)
1000
500
0
0 15 30 45 60 75 90
Lamina orientation [°]

Fig. 10. Curves load vs. twisting of the free end for channel cross-section cantilever Fig. 13. Critical load vs. lamina orientation of laminates 1 and 2 for the cruciform
beam. cross-section cantilever beam corresponding to the bending mode.

t=2

Fy = 0.001F
2
100

A B Fx y

2000
1
z
y
60
x

Fig. 11. Cruciform cross-section cantilever beam and loading to evaluate the critical load corresponding to the flexural mode.
 ARTICLE IN PRESS
1370 J.E.B. Cardoso et al. / Thin-Walled Structures 47 (2009) 1363–1372

t=2

Mx
= 0.001F 2
mm

100
A B Fx y

2000 1
z
y
60
x

Fig. 14. Cruciform cross-section cantilever beam and loading to evaluate the critical load corresponding to the torsional mode.

1.2
25
1.0

Critical Load [KN]

20
0.8
F/Fcr

0.6 15

0.4
10
0.2
5
0.0
0.00 0.03 0.06 0.09 0.12 0.15
0
θx [rad] 0 15 30 45 60 75 90
Fig. 15. Load vs. twisting curve for the cruciform cross-section cantilever beam Lamina orientation [°]
corresponding to the buckling torsion mode.
Fig. 16. Critical load vs. lamina orientation of both laminates simultaneously for
the cruciform cross-section cantilever beam.

The Fig. 12 shows the relation between the normalized applied

load and the normalized tip displacement in the perturbation 1.6E+07
force direction. We may verify that the critical load value obtained 1.4E+07
corresponds to the theoretical one. 1.2E+07
GJ [N.mm^2]

The influence of the lamina orientation of the laminates 1 and 1.0E+07

2 on the critical load is shown in Fig. 13. The dashed curve
8.0E+06
represents the variation of the critical load vs. lamina orientation
6.0E+06
of laminate 1, keeping the lamina orientation of laminated 2 equal
to 01. The continuous curve represents the variation of the critical 4.0E+06
load vs. lamina orientation of laminate 2, keeping the lamina 2.0E+06
orientation of laminated 1 equal to 01. 0.0E+00
From Fig. 13, we verify that when laminate 1 is unidirectional 0 15 30 45 60 75 90
(01), the critical load varies between Fcr ¼ 3110 N, for an unidirec- Lamina orientation [°]
tional (01) configuration of the laminate 2, and Fcr ¼ 228 N, when
Fig. 17. Torsion stiffness vs. lamina orientation of both laminates simultaneously
configuration of laminate 2 is [90/90/90/90]S. for the cruciform cross-section.
Keeping laminate 2 unidirectional (01), the influence of lamina
orientation of the laminate 1 on the critical load is imperceptible
(dashed line). The value of the critical load is approximately
Fcr ¼ 3110 N for any configuration of laminate 1. This was a 1.0E+10
9.0E+09
predictable situation, since the laminate 2 has a great contribution
8.0E+09
ωω [N.mm^4]

to the bending stiffness of the cross-section, in contrast to 7.0E+09

laminate 1, which contribution is insignificant. 6.0E+09
In a second case, also for a cantilever beam, to determine the 5.0E+09
critical load corresponding the torsion mode, a perturbation 4.0E+09
EJωω

moment Mx/mm ¼ 0.001F is considered, as indicated in Fig. 14. 3.0E+09

Considering the configuration [45/45/45/45]S for both 2.0E+09
laminates, the theoretical critical load value obtained using Eq. 1.0E+09
0.0E+00
(23), where Ky is the equivalency factor related to the Euler
0 15 30 45 60 75 90
column to torsion and EIps is the polar bending stiffness related to
Lamina orientation [°]
the shear center, is Fcr ¼ 21568 N.
The Fig. 15 presents the variation of the tip twisting rotation Fig. 18. Warping property vs. lamina orientation of both laminates simultaneously
with the applied load normalized by the theoretical value. We for the cruciform cross-section.
 ARTICLE IN PRESS
J.E.B. Cardoso et al. / Thin-Walled Structures 47 (2009) 1363–1372 1371

Fy = 0.001F Fy = 0.001F

Fx Fx

A C B A C B

1000 1000

z
y

Fig. 19. Cruciform cross-section beam and loading to evaluate the critical load corresponding to the bending mode; (a) clamped–clamped and (b) clamped–simple
supported.

Fig. 20. Load vs. displacement curves for the cruciform cross-section beam corresponding to the bending mode; (a) clamped–clamped and (b) clamped–simple supported.

may verify that the critical load value obtained corresponds to the linear behavior, based on an updated Lagrangean formulation, has
theoretical one. been presented. Warping deformation is included. To define the
The variation of the critical load vs. lamina orientation of both load–deflection path, a generalized displacement control method
laminates simultaneous is presented in Fig. 16. has been implemented. The thin-walled cross-sections are
The Eq. (23) show the influence of the torsion stiffness and modeled as assemblies of flat symmetric laminated panels and
warping property terms on the beam critical load. Taking the their bending-torsion properties are defined in terms of the cross-
properties of the unidirectional (01) laminate as reference in this section geometry, warping function and properties of the
case, where the beam length is L ¼ 2000 mm, we may conclude corresponding laminate at each point. The cross-section geometry
that the torsion stiffness GJ ¼ 2:14  106 N mm2 has much is discretized by quadratic isoparametric finite elements to
more influence on the beam critical load than the term determine its bending-torsion properties. The structural beam
ðp2 EJ oo Þ=ðK 2y L2 Þ ¼ 0:0058  106 N mm2 corresponding to the modeling is formulated throughout three-dimensional two-node
warping property. hermitean finite beam elements.
The Figs. 17 and 18 show, respectively, the variation of the The warping function is dependent not only on the cross-
torsion stiffness and warping property with the lamina section geometry but as well as on the cross-section material
orientation of both laminates simultaneously. Comparing Figs. distribution.
16 and 17, we conclude that the variation of the critical load The critical load for an isotropic cross-section beam has been
follows the same trajectory as the variation of the torsion stiffness. calculated and is in agreement with its theoretical value. The
Now, the critical load and the post-buckling path are influence of the lamina orientation on the structural behavior as
determined for a clamped–clamped (Fig. 19a) and a well as on the critical load of composite laminated beams has
clamped–simple supported beam (Fig. 19b), considering the been studied. As one expected, the critical load of laminate
configuration [45/45/45/45]S for both laminates. The composite beam is strongly dependent on the lamina orientation,
nonlinear response is represented, respectively, in Fig. 20a and hence this orientation is a fundamental parameter to these
b, where the curves were normalized with respect to the structures. Also, the bending mode critical load variation vs.
theoretical critical load values obtained by the Eq. (23) and to lamina orientation follows nearly the same trajectory as the
the mid-span displacement. These values are Fcr ¼ 6314.7 N and variation of the laminate equivalent membrane longitudinal
Fcr ¼ 3321.8 N for the clamped–clamped beam and for the modulus. On the other hand, the torsion mode critical load
clamped–simple supported beam, respectively. The figures show variation vs. lamina orientation follows nearly the same trajectory
a good agreement between numerical and theoretical values. as the variation of the St. Venant torsion stiffness.

7. Concluding remarks References

A finite element model for structural analysis of composite [1] Vlasov VZ. Thin-walled elastic beams. Israel Program for Scientific Transla-
laminated thin-walled beam structures with geometrically non- tions, Jerusalem; 1961.
 ARTICLE IN PRESS
1372 J.E.B. Cardoso et al. / Thin-Walled Structures 47 (2009) 1363–1372

[2] Barsoum RS, Gallagher RH. Finite element analysis of torsional and torsional- [25] Yu W, Hodges DH, Volovoi VV, Fuchs ED. A generalized Vlasov theory for
flexural stability problems. International Journal for Numerical Methods in composite beams. Thin-Walled Structures 2005;43:1493–511.
Engineering 1970;2:335–52. [26] Bhaskar K, Librescu L. A geometrically non-linear theory for laminated
[3] Bazant ZP, El Nimeiri M. Large deflection spatial buckling of thin walled anisotropic thin-walled beams. International Journal of Engineering Science
beams and frames. Journal of Engineering Mechanics Division 1995;33(9):1331–44.
1973;99(EM6):1259–81. [27] Lee J, Kim S. Flexural-torsional buckling of thin-walled I-section composites.
[4] Chen WF, Atsuta T. Theory of beam-columns—volume 2: space behavior and Computers and Structures 2001;79:987–95.
design. New York: McGraw-Hill; 1977. [28] Kabir M, Sherbourne A. Optimal fibre orientation in lateral stability of
[5] Pittaluga A. Recent developments in the theory of thin walled beams. laminated channel section beams. Composites: Part B 1998;29B:81–7.
Computers and Structures 1978;3:69–79. [29] Fraternali F, Feo L. On a moderate rotation of thin-walled composite beams.
[6] Cardoso JB, Soares CAM. Finite element structural analysis based on the Composites: Part B 2000;31:141–58.
Vlasov beam theory. Second National Symposium of Theoretical and Applied [30] Lee J, Lee S. Flexural-torsional behavior of thin-walled composite beams.
Mechanics, 1979, Lisbon, Portugal. Thin-Walled Structures 2004;42:1293–305.
[7] Soares CAM, Cardoso JB. Finite element dynamic analysis of structures based [31] Cardoso JB, Benedito NM, Valido AJ. Finite element analysis of geometrically
on the Vlasov beam theory. Euromech 122, 1979. Numerical Analysis of the nonlinear thin-walled composite laminated beams. Technical report, Depart-
Dynamics of Ship Structures, Paris, France. ment of Mechanical Engineering, Instituto Superior Técnico, Lisboa, Portugal,
[8] Gjelsvik A. The theory of thin-walled beams. New York: Wiley; 1981. 2006.
[9] Meek JL, Ho PTS. A simple finite element for warping torsion problem. [32] Cesnik CE, Sutyrin VG, Hodges D. Cross-sectional analysis of composite beams
Computer Methods in Applied Mechanics and Engineering 1983;37:25–36. including large initial twist and curvature effects. AIAA Journal
[10] Roberts TM, Azizian ZG. Nonlinear analysis of thin walled bars of open cross- 1996;34(9):1913–20.
section. International Journal of Mechanical Sciences 1983;25:565–77. [33] Yu W, Volovoi VV, Hodges DH, Hong X. Validation of the variational
[11] Murray N. Introduction to the theory of thin-walled structures. Oxford: asymptotic beam sectional analysis. AIAA Journal 2002;40(10):2105–12.
Claredon Press; 1984. [34] Kim NI, Shin DK, Kim MY. Improved flexural-torsional stability analysis of
[12] Attard MM. Nonlinear theory of non-uniform torsion of thin-walled open thin-walled composite beam and exact stiffness matrix. International Journal
beams. Thin-Walled Structures 1986;4:101–34. of Mechanical Sciences 2007;49(8):950–69.
[13] Gendy A, Saleeb A, Chang T. Generalized thin-walled beam models for [35] Kollár LP. Flexural-torsional buckling of open section composite columns with
flexural-torsional analysis. Computers and Structures 1992;42(4):531–50. shear deformation. International Journal of Solids and Structures 2001;
[14] Pi YL, Bradford MA. Effects of approximations in analyses of beams of open 38(42–43):7525–41.
thin-walled cross-section—part I: flexure-torsional stability. International [36] Sapkás Á, Kollár LP. Lateral-torsional buckling of composite beams. Interna-
Journal of Numerical Methods in Engineering 2001;51:757–72. tional Journal of Solids and Structures 2002;39(11):2939–63.
[15] Pi YL, Bradford MA. Effects of approximations in analyses of beams of open [37] Machado SP, Cortı́nez VH. Non-linear model for stability of thin-walled
thin-walled cross-section–part II: 3-D non-linear behaviour. International composite beams with shear deformation. Thin-Walled Structures
Journal of Numerical Methods in Engineering 2001;51:773–90. 2005;43(10):1615–45.
[16] Mohri F, Azrar L, Potier-Ferry M. Lateral post-buckling analysis of thin-walled [38] Cortı́nez VH, Piovan MT. Stability of composite thin-walled beams with shear
open sections beams. Thin Walled Structures 2002;40:1013–36. deformability. Computers and Structures 2006;84(15–16):978–90.
[17] Lee J. Center of gravity and shear center of thin-walled open-section [39] Piovan MT, Cortı́nez VH. Mechanics of shear deformable thin-walled beams
composite beams. Composite Structures 2001;52:255–60. made of composite materials. Thin-Walled Structures 2007;45(1):37–62.
[18] Valido A, Cardoso JB. Design sensitivity analysis of composite thin-walled beam [40] Yang Y, Kuo S. Theory & analysis of nonlinear framed structures. Englewood
cross-sections. In: Proceedings of sixth WCSMO 2005, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil. Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall; 1994.
[19] Rajasekaran S. Mechanical properties of thin-walled composite beams of [41] Valido AJ, Cardoso JB. Geometrically nonlinear composite beam struc-
generic open and closed sections. Structural Engineering and Mechanics tures–design sensitivity analysis. Engineering Optimization 2003;35(5):
2005;21(5):591–620. 531–51.
[20] Rand O. Fundamental closed-form solutions for solid and thin-walled [42] Cardoso JB, Sousa L, Valido AJ. Optimal design of path-dependent nonlinear
composite beams including a complete out-of-plane warping model. structures with critical and post-critical behaviour. CIMS 2000: 651–58. In:
International Journal Solids and Structures 1998;35(21):2775–93. Proceedings of third International Conference on Coupled Instabilities in
[21] Rand O. Similarities between solid and thin-walled composite beams by Metal Structures, Lisbon, Portugal.
analytic approach. Journal of Aircraft 1998;35(4):604–15. [43] Sousa L, Cardoso JB, Valido AJ. Optimal design of elastic-plastic structures
[22] Bauld N, Tzeng L. A Vlasov theory for fiber-reinforced beams with thin-walled with post-critical behaviour. Structural Optimization 1999;17(2–3):147–54.
open cross sections. International Journal Solids and Structures [44] Bathe K. Finite element procedures in engineering analysis. Englewood Cliffs,
1984;20(3):277–97. NJ: Prentice-Hall; 1982.
[23] Wu XX, Sun CT. Simplified theory for composite thin-walled beams. AIAA [45] Tsai SW. Theory of composites design. Think Composites 1992.
Journal 1992;30(12):2945–51. [46] Turkalj G, Brnic J, Prpic-Orsic J. Large rotation analysis of elastic thin-walled
[24] Taufik A, Barrace JJ, Lorin F. Composite beam analysis with arbitrary cross- beam-type structures using ESA approach. Computers and Structures
section. Computers and Structures 1999;44:189–94. 2003;81:1851–64.