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
, Anbal J.J. Valido
b
a
Instituto Superior Tecnico, Departamento de Engenharia Mecanica, Av. Rovisco Pais, 1049-001 Lisboa, Portugal
b
Escola Superior de Tecnologia, Instituto Polite cnico de Setubal, Campus do IPS, Estefanilha, 2914-508 Setubal, Portugal
a r t i c l e i n f o
Article history:
Received 7 December 2007
Received in revised form
14 July 2008
Accepted 11 March 2009
Available online 27 May 2009
Keywords:
Thin-walled beams
Composites
Nonlinear structures
Finite elements
a b s t r a c t
A nite element model for structural analysis of composite laminated thin-walled beam structures, with
geometrically nonlinear behavior, including torsion warping deformation, is presented. A general
continuum formulation considering the updated Lagrangean procedure and a generalized displacement
control method, are used to describe the deformation of the structure. The beam cross-section geometry
is discretized by quadratic isoparametric nite elements to determine its bending-torsion properties.
The structural discretization is performed throughout three-dimensional two-node Hermitean nite
beam elements, with seven degrees-of-freedom per node. Several applications are presented,
addressing the inuence of lamina orientation on the structural behavior.
& 2009 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
1. Introduction
The demanding for more economic structures is generally
translated in the production of lighter structures and it has
brought up the needs of the utilization of composite materials and
the consideration of large structural deformations. Today, the use
of composite materials is generalized to a large variety of
structures due to their good strength/weight and stiffness/weight
ratios when compared to conventional materials.
Thin-walled beams are also applied to various structures, due
to their large axial stiffness and large bending stiffness associated
to a small weight. These features may be reinforced if composite
materials are used in the beam construction. Since thin-walled
beams are slender, stability problems should be considered in
their design. On the other hand, in the case of thin-walled open
cross-sections, the torsion stiffness is lower and the warping
effects may be relevant.
In a standard nite element analysis of stiffened plate and shell
structures it is necessary of a large number of degrees-of-freedom in
discretizing them. Alternatively, some of these structures may be
analyzed by a two-phase strategy: (i) nite element analysis of
cross-section geometry to determine the bending and torsion
properties of the structure as a beam; and (ii) nite element analysis
of the structure based on a general thin-walled beam theory.
Thin-walled beams made of isotropic materials have been
studied by many authors [116]. Some works have been devoted
to the analysis of the exural-torsion properties of thin-walled
composite beams [1719]. In [20,21], closed-form solutions for
solid and thin-walled composite beams were presented.
Vlasovs theory was extended for the bending and twisting of
thin-walled composite beams with open cross-section made from
symmetric ber-reinforced laminates [22,23] and for composite
beams with arbitrary geometric and material sectional properties
[24,25]. A geometrically nonlinear theory for composite thin-
walled beams accounting for nite exural displacements and
arbitrarily large twist angle has been presented in [26]. In [27], an
analytical model to the analysis of exural, torsion and exural-
torsion buckling of a thin-walled I-section composite beam
subject to axial load is developed. The bending-torsion behavior
of thin-walled composite beams has also been studied in [2831].
In [25,32,33], thin-walled composite beams based on the varia-
tional asymptotical beam sectional (VABS) approach had been
studied. This approach is used to rigorously split the geometrically
nonlinear three-dimensional (3D) elasticity problem into a linear
2D cross-section analysis and a nonlinear 1D beam analysis,
instead of invoking ad hoc kinematic assumptions. In [34], an
improved stability theory for the spatially coupled stability
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 inuence of
transverse and torsion shear deformation on buckling loads of
composite beams is studied. In [37], the study of this inuence is
extended for post-buckling analysis.
ARTICLE IN PRESS
Contents lists available at ScienceDirect
journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/tws
Thin-Walled Structures
0263-8231/$ - see front matter & 2009 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
doi:10.1016/j.tws.2009.03.002

Corresponding author. Tel.: +351218417725.

E-mail addresses: barradas@ist.utl.pt (J.E.B. Cardoso),
avalido@est.ips.pt (A.J.J. Valido).
Thin-Walled Structures 47 (2009) 13631372
The present work presents a nite element model for structural
analysis of composite laminated thin-walled beam structures, with
geometrically nonlinear behavior, including post-critical behavior
and warping deformation. To achieve this goal, an updated
Lagrangean description for the nonlinear structural deformation is
used, and the structural analysis is performed by a displacement-
controlled continuation method [40]. This method has been used
successfully by the authors for nonlinear analysis of beam structures
as well as truss structures, including post-critical behavior [4143].
In this paper, the thin-walled beams are composed by composite at
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
stiffness of the panels that constitute the cross-section, which
depend by their side on the laminate conguration and lamina
material distribution. Though the laminates present symmetric and
balanced stacking sequences, these sequences may change in
different laminates, i.e., the cross-section thin walls can have
different lay-up distributions provided they keep symmetry and
balance. The cross-section geometry is discretized by quadratic
isoparametric nite elements to determine its bending-torsion
properties [18]. The structural discretization is formulated through-
out three-dimensional two-node Hermitean nite beam elements.
Numerical examples are performed on open cross-section beams,
where the structural behavior and particularly the critical load
magnitude related to the lamina orientation are investigated.
2. Model assumptions
The present work addresses to straight thin-walled composite
beams of arbitrary cross-section with geometrically nonlinear
behavior.
The beams are made from an assembly of thin at-layered
panels, each panel corresponding to a laminate (Fig. 1). A beam
referential system (x, y, z) for the member geometry and cross-
section properties for which the y and z axes lie in the plane of the
cross-section and the x-axis is parallel to the longitudinal axis of
the beam, a local panel coordinate system (x, n, s), wherein the n-
axis is normal to the middle surface of a panel and the s-axis is
directed along the cross-section contour middle line, and a
material axes system (1, 2) for each ply, are used. The point (y
s
,
z
s
) dene the location of the shear center with respect to the
elastic center.
The following assumptions are adopted:
(1) the contour does not deform in its own plane;
(2) the warping function is dependent on the material arrange-
ment of the laminates;
(3) the shearing deformation of the middle surface is zero in each
panel;
(4) each panel behaves as a thin plate. This implies that the
Kirchoff hypothesis is valid for each plate element;
(5) each laminated panel is symmetric and balanced;
(6) the strains are small but large displacements and rotations are
allowed; and
(7) the effect of the shear deformation due torsion and bending is
negligible.
3. Nonlinear structural analysis
Using the updated Lagrangean formulation to describe the
motion of the continuum [44], and matrix and tensor notations,
we get the linearized incremental virtual work equation at the
load level t as
_

t
S d
t

L

t
r d
t

N
d
t
V
_
t
f dud
t
V
_
t
T
0
dud
t
G
T
(1)
and the incremental constitutive law
t
S E
t
e (2)
where
t
S, f, u and
t
T
0
are, respectively, the stress, body force,
displacement and prescribed surface traction increments,
t
r is the
Cauchy stress measure, E is the tangent constitutive tensor, and
the Green-Lagrange strain tensor increment is given as
t
e
t
e
L

t
e
N
;
t
e
L

t
bu
T
;
t
e
N

1
2
t
Zu
T
; u
T
(3)
with
t
b and
t
g operators dened as
t
b
1
2
t
r
_

t
r
_
T

t
r
_
t
r
t
u
T
_ _ _
T

t
r
t
u
T
_ _ _
t
r
_
T
_ _
t
Za; b
1
2
t
r a
_
t
r b
_
T

t
r b
_
t
r a
_
T
_ _
(4)
In the foregoing equations
t
u is the displacement eld at the
load level t, r (@/@y, @/@z), is the space gradient operator, d refers
to arbitrary variation of the state elds and refers to the
standard tensor product. The left superscript and the left
subscript, stand respectively for the congurations where the
quantities are measured and referred to. If the congurations
where the quantities are measured and referred to are the same,
only the superscript is used.
To dene the loaddeection path, a generalized displacement
control method [40] has been implemented.
4. Cross-section analysis
By using a thin-walled beam theory, the points of the cross-
section have three properties: their coordinates (y, z) on the plane
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
at laminated panels, the properties of the corresponding laminate
at each point have also to be considered. These distributed point
properties are integrated over the cross-section area, giving the
following cross-section bending-torsion-independent properties
EA
_
E
n
dA; ES
y

_
E
n
z dA; ES
z

_
E
n
y dA;
EI
yy

_
E
n
z
2
dA; EI
yz

_
E
n
yz dA; EI
zz

_
E
n
y
2
dA;
EJ
o

_
E
n
odA; EJ
yo

_
E
n
yodA; EJ
zo

_
E
n
zodA;
EJ
oo

_
E
n
o
2
dA (5)
ARTICLE IN PRESS
x
z
y
x
i
1
2
Laminate i
n
i
s
t
s
i
x, u
0
y, v
0
z, w
0
n
s
E
S
y
s
zs

x
Fig. 1. Thin-walled composite beam coordinate systems.
J.E.B. Cardoso et al. / Thin-Walled Structures 47 (2009) 13631372 1364
where commas stand for partial derivatives. If the coordinates y
and z are central and the warping function is referred to the shear
center and normalized, then
ES
y
ES
z
EJ
o
EJ
yo
EJ
zo
0 (6)
From the properties presented in Eq. (5), let us distinguish the
warping property EJ
oo
, as an independent property, the combina-
tion of others to dene the St. Venant torsion stiffness as
GJ
_
G
n
y
2
z
2
yo;
z
zo;
y
_ _
dA
_
G
n
r ro rdA

_
G
n
y
2
z
2
y o;
z
z o;
y
_ _
dA
_
G
n
r r o rdA (7)
where o and o are the warping functions referred, respectively, to
the shear and elastic centers and
r r r
S
y; z; y y y
S
; z z z
S
(8)
where r (z, y) is a vector of coordinates with respect to the
elastic center.
The location of the elastic center is given as
y
E

ES
z
EA
; z
E

ES
y
EA
(9)
and the location of the shear center is given as
y
S

EI
zz
EJ
zo
EI
yz
EJ
yo
EI
yy
EI
zz
EI
2
yz
; z
S

EI
yy
EJ
yo
EI
yz
EJ
zo
EI
yy
EI
zz
EI
2
yz
(10)
We may note the warping properties EJ
yo
and EJ
zo
in Eq. (10) to
determine the position of the shear center, are dependent on the
warping function referred to the elastic center.
In the determination of the bending cross-section properties,
the equivalent membrane longitudinal modulus E
x
m
is used, since
for thin-walled beams the normal stresses due to bending
correspond essentially to a membrane effect in the laminate.
According to the classical torsion theory of isotropic thin-walled
open cross-section beams, the shear stresses within the element
thickness varies linearly from a positive to a negative value at the
surfaces and zero at the mid-plane. In this case, the applied
torsion moment is resisted by an equilibrating system of
distributed moments in the panels, representing a bending mode
of response. Hence, to calculate the torsion properties of the open
parts of the cross-section, the corresponding shear modulus value
should be the bending equivalent value G
xs
b
. For closed cross-
sections, the stress distribution is assumed constant throughout
the element thickness, corresponding to a membrane mode of
response. So, to calculate the torsion properties of the closed parts
of the cross-section, we must use the membrane equivalent shear
modulus G
xs
m
. For a symmetric laminate, these equivalent
modules are given as
E
n
E
m
x

1
ta
11
; G
n
G
b
xs

12
t
3
d
66
or G
n
G
m
xs

1
ta
66
(11)
where t is the laminate thickness, and the compliance coefcients
a
ij
and d
ij
are obtained by inverting the laminate constitutive
equations. The superscripts m and b indicate the membrane and
bending modes, respectively [45].
To determine the warping function o(y, z), one uses the stress
variational equilibrium equation
_
s
xy;y
s
xz;z
dodA 0 (12)
that after integration and substitution of the stress displacement
relations of elasticity for torsion leads to
dP
_
G
n
ro rddA
_
G
n
r rdodA 0 (13)
For numerical implementation of the Eq. (13), the cross-section
geometry is discretized with quadratic isoparametric nite
elements. The authors code is used to solve in a generalized
form, the warping function and the bending-torsion properties of
either solid, either thin-walled open or closed composite cross-
sections. It extends the code implemented in [6,7] for isotropic
materials.
5. Beam element model
The structural discretization is formulated throughout three-
dimensional two-node Hermitean nite beam elements with
seven degrees-of-freedom per node. To uncouple the governing
equations for torsion and exure, two reference lines are used: the
centroidal axis (line of elastic centers E) for stretching and
bending components, and the line of shear centers S for shear,
twisting and warping components (Fig. 2). The incremental
vectors of nodal displacements and nodal forces are, respectively,
U f u
1
v
1
w
1
y
x1
y
y1
y
z1
y
0
x1
u
2
v
2
w
2
y
x2
y
y2
y
z2
y
0
x2
g
T
(14)
and
F f F
x1
F
y1
F
z1
M
x1
M
y1
M
z1
B
1
F
x2
F
y2
F
z2
M
x2
M
y2
M
z2
B
2 g
T
(15)
In Eq. (14), u
k
, v
k
and w
k
are the element k-node incremental
displacement components of the elastic center, respectively, in the
x, y and z directions; y
xk
, y
yk
and y
zk
, are the element k-node
incremental rotations about x, y and z axis, respectively; and the
right upper coma stands for the derivative with respect to x. In Eq.
(15), F
xk
, F
yk
and F
zk
are the element k-node incremental force
components, respectively, in the x, y and z directions; M
xk
, M
yk
and
M
zk
are the element k-node incremental moments around x-, y-
and z-axis, respectively; and B
k
is the incremental bimoment at
the node k of the element.
With reference to Fig. 1, the incremental displacement of any
point of the cross-section is given by
u
x
x; y; z ux yy
z
x zy
y
x oy; zwx
u
y
x; y; z vx z z
S
y
x
x
u
z
x; y; z wx y y
S
y
x
x (16)
where w represents the intensity of warping. Assuming the effect
of the shear deformation due torsion and bending is negligible,
thus
w y
x;x
dy
x
=dx and y
y
w
S;x
dw
S
=dx; y
z
v
S;x
dv
S
=dx (17)
The beam Green strain measure at load level t can be given by
the vector
t

xx
2
t

xy
2
t

xz
_ _
T
(18)
and its increment is given by the Eqs. (3) and (4) as
t
^ e
t
^ e
L

t
^ e
N

t

xx
2
t

xy
2
t

xz
_

_
_

t
e
xx
t
e
xy
t
e
xz
_

_
_

t
Z
xx
t
Z
xy
t
Z
xz
_

_
_

_
(19)
ARTICLE IN PRESS
J.E.B. Cardoso et al. / Thin-Walled Structures 47 (2009) 13631372 1365
where
t

xx

@u
x
@x

@u
x
@x
@
t
u
x
@x

@u
y
@x
@
t
u
y
@x

@u
z
@x
@
t
u
z
@x

1
2
@u
x
@x
_ _
2
_

@u
y
@x
_ _
2

@u
z
@x
_ _
2
_
2
t

xy

@u
x
@y

@u
y
@x

@u
x
@x
@
t
u
x
@y

@
t
u
x
@x
@u
x
@y

@u
y
@x
@
t
u
y
@y

@
t
u
y
@x
@u
y
@y

@u
z
@x
@
t
u
z
@y

@
t
u
z
@x
@u
z
@y

@u
x
@x
@u
x
@y

@u
y
@x
@u
y
@y

@u
z
@x
@u
z
@y
_ _
2
t

xz

@u
x
@z

@w
@x

@u
x
@x
@
t
u
x
@z

@
t
u
x
@x
@u
x
@z

@u
y
@x
@
t
u
y
@z

@
t
u
y
@x
@u
y
@z

@u
z
@x
@
t
u
z
@z

@
t
u
z
@x
@u
z
@z

@u
x
@x
@u
x
@z

@u
y
@x
@u
y
@z

@u
z
@x
@u
z
@z
_ _
(20)
The increments of the stress components are obtained,
considering the linear part of the strain incremental vector in
Eq. (2), as
t
S
xx
t
S
xy
t
S
xz
_

_
_

0 0
0 G

0
0 0 G

_
_

_
t
e
xx
t
e
xy
t
e
xz
_

_
_

_
(21)
where E* E
x
m
and G* G
xs
m
(if the point belongs to the closed
part of the cross-section) or G* G
xs
b
(if the point belongs to the
cross-section open part), are the equivalent laminate modulus
dened in Section 3.
Using the nite element modeling, it is adopted a linear
displacement eld for u(x) and a cubic displacement eld for the
other generalized displacements. Then, the Eq. (1) of incremental
virtual work becomes

t
K
L

t
K
NL
U
t
P (22)
where
t
K
L
and
t
K
NL
are, respectively, the linear and the nonlinear
(or geometric) parts of the; tangent stiffness matrix at load level t,
t
P is the incremental vector of external forces and U is the
incremental nodal displacement vector.
6. Numerical examples
6.1. Thin-walled asymmetric cross-section cantilever beam
A thin-walled asymmetrical channel-section cantilever beam
shown in Fig. 3 is considered. To calculate the bending-torsion
cross-section properties, the cross-section is discretized by 36
eight node quadratic isoparametric nite elements. The beam is
discretized by eight nite elements of equal length.
In a rst case, an isotropic section of thickness t 5mm is
considered. The material is given by E 300MPa and G 115
ARTICLE IN PRESS
z
y
1
0
0
20
40
E
4
3
.
8

6.2
2000
x
y
A B
z
F
z
= 0.001F
F
t
Fig. 3. Cantilever beam, cross-section geometry and nite element mesh.
x
v
1
v
2
u
1
'
w
1
w
2
u
2
E
1
E
2
z
y
S
2
S
1
x
E
1
E
2
z
y
S
2
S
1
t
B
1
t
M
y
t
F
x
1
t
F
y
1
t
F
z
1
t
M
y
2
t
F
y
2
t
F
z
2
t
F
x
2
t
M
z
2
t
M
x
2
t
B
2
t
M
x
1
t
M
z
1
x
1
'
x
2

y
1

y
2

z
2

x
2

x
1

z
1
1
Fig. 2. Nodal displacements and nodal forces for the beam element.
J.E.B. Cardoso et al. / Thin-Walled Structures 47 (2009) 13631372 1366
MPa. The location of the shear center was calculated as
y
S
26.3mm and z
S
12.8mm. As the cross-section is
asymmetric, the column instability will occur in a exural-torsion
mode. The critical load was evaluated and compared with the
theoretical one given by [8]
F
y

p
2
EI
yy
K
2
y
L
2
; F
z

p
2
EI
zz
K
2
z
L
2
; F
y

A
I
ps
GJ
p
2
EI
oo
K
2
y
L
2
_ _
(23)
The Fig. 4 shows the loaddeection curves, where the
theoretical value F
cr
14.02N has been considered. One may
observe the agreement between this value and the calculated
value. In [46], the curve F=F
cr
y
xB
was calculated for the same
beam. We may observe the agreement between its trajectory in
[46] and the trajectory shown in Fig. 4.
In a second case the same structure was considered, but with
the cross-section formed by three equal laminates with eight
layers [y/y/y/y]
S
and total thickness t 1mm. The material
properties are E
1
140GPa, E
2
10GPa, n
12
0.3 and G
12
5
GPa.
Considering the laminate conguration [45/45/45/45]
S
and
a negative perturbation force as indicated in Fig. 5, the critical
ARTICLE IN PRESS
Fig. 4. Load vs. displacement curves for asymmetrical channel-section isotropic cantilever beam: (a) F=Fcr yxB
, (b) F/F
cr
w
B
/L and (c) F/F
cr
v
B
/L.
0
30
60
90
120
150
180
-0.5
x_B [rad]
F

[
N
]
2000
x
y
A B
z
F
z
= 0.001F
F
-0.4 -0.3 -0.2 -0.1 0.0
Fig. 5. Negative perturbation force and load vs. twisting curve for asymmetrical channel cross-section composite cantilever beam.
0
30
60
90
120
150
180
0.00
F

[
N
]
2000
x
y
A B
z
F
z
= 0.001F
F
0.05 0.10 0.15 0.20 0.25
x_B [rad]
Fig. 6. Positive perturbation force and load vs. twisting curve for asymmetrical channel cross-section composite cantilever beam.
J.E.B. Cardoso et al. / Thin-Walled Structures 47 (2009) 13631372 1367
load obtained is F
cr
147.79N. The load vs. twisting curve, F y
xB
,
is also presented in Fig. 5.
Considering a positive perturbation force, the critical load
obtained is 149.87N. This case is represented in Fig. 6. Comparing
the load vs. twisting curves of Figs. 5 and 6, we observe the post-
critical behavior of the beam is quite different.
The linear critical buckling load was also obtained by
eigenvalue analysis using ANSYS code, as F
cr
147.24N, where
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
critical load value should be compared with the one obtained
when a positive perturbation force was considered.
The inuence of the lamina orientation on the critical load was
also investigated. The Fig. 8 shows the variation of the critical load
and the variation of the laminate equivalent membrane
longitudinal modulus with the lamina orientation. The critical
load variation follows nearly the same trajectory as the variation
of the laminate equivalent membrane modulus. This may indicate
the mode corresponding to the critical load is essentially a exural
mode.
6.2. Channel cross-section cantilever beam
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 F
z
applied at the elastic center of the
free end. To calculate the bending-torsion cross-section
properties, the cross-section is discretized by 44 eight node
quadratic isoparametric nite elements. The beam is discretized
by eight nite elements of equal length.
Two laminates identied in the Fig. 9 as 1 and 2, with four
layers [y/y]
S
and total thickness t 3mm, forms the cross-
section. The material properties E
1
48.3GPa, E
2
19.8GPa,
n
12
0.27, G
12
8.96GPa, 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 y
s
, 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 F
z
, the beam undergoes bending in the
plane zx, coupled bendingtwisting. Fig. 10 shows the free end
curves load vs. twisting for each case.
We may observe that the unidirectional lay-up in web and
anges (case 1) leads to the smaller torsion stiffness and to the
largest warping property; otherwise, the angle-ply lay-up in both
web and anges (case 2) has the opposite effect. Comparing to the
ARTICLE IN PRESS
DISPLACEMENT
STEP = 1
SUB = 1
FREQ = 147.242
DMX = 1.405
JUL 7 2006
15:24:41
C assimetrico composito (eigenbuckling analysis)
1
Z
Fig. 7. Buckling mode obtained by eigenvalue analysis using ANSYS for
asymmetrical channel cross-section composite cantilever beam.
0
100
200
300
400
500
600
0
Lamina orientation []
C
r
i
t
i
c
a
l

L
o
a
d

[
N
]
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
140
160
E
x
_
m

[
G
P
a
]
15 30 45 60 75 90 0
Lamina orientation []
15 30 45 60 75 90
Fig. 8. Critical load vs. lamina orientation and laminate equivalent membrane longitudinal modulus vs. lamina orientation for asymmetrical channel cross-section
composite cantilever beam.
z
y
E
5
0
2000
50
d
y
s
S
x
y
A
B
z
F
z
t = 3
1
1
2
Fig. 9. Channel cross-section cantilever beam.
J.E.B. Cardoso et al. / Thin-Walled Structures 47 (2009) 13631372 1368
unidirectional lay-up (case 1), the cross-section torsion stiffness
and warping property are more affected by the lamina orientation
of laminate 1 (case 4) than by the lamina orientation of the
laminate 2 (case 3). The twisting rotation reaches the greater
value in the case 1 and the smaller value in the case 4. However,
we may note that in the case 4 the torsion moment is smaller than
in the other cases, since the elastic center and the shear center are
closer.
6.3. Thin-walled cruciform cross-section beam
In this example, the critical loads corresponding to exural and
torsion instability modes of the cruciform cross-section beam are
determined. Two laminates identied in the gures as 1 and 2,
with eight layers [y/y/y/y]
S
and total thickness t 2mm, form
the cross-section. The material properties are E
1
140GPa,
E
2
10GPa, n
12
0.3, G
12
5GPa.
To calculate the bending-torsion cross-section properties, the
cross-section is discretized by 44 eight node quadratic isopara-
metric nite elements. The beam is discretized by eight hermitean
two-node beam nite elements of equal length.
In a rst case, for a cantilever beam, to determine the critical
load corresponding the bending mode, a lateral perturbation force
F
y
0.001F is considered (Fig. 11). Considering the conguration
of both laminates as [45/45/45/45]
S
, the theoretical value of
the critical load obtained using the Eq. (23), where K
z
is the
equivalency factor related to the Euler column, is F
cr
394.67N.
ARTICLE IN PRESS
x
y
z
2000
y
A B
F
y
= 0.001F
F
x
1
0
0

60
z
t = 2
2
1
Fig. 11. Cruciform cross-section cantilever beam and loading to evaluate the critical load corresponding to the exural mode.
0.0
0.5
1.0
1.5
2.0
-1.0
VB/L
F
/
F
c
r
-0.8 -0.6 -0.4 -0.2 0.0
Fig. 12. Load vs. displacement curve for the cruciform cross-section cantilever
beam corresponding to the bending mode.
0
500
1000
1500
2000
2500
3000
3500
0
Lamina orientation []
F
c
r

[
N
]
Laminate 1 (Laminate 2 at 0)
Laminate 2 (Laminate 1 at 0)
15 30 45 60 75 90
Fig. 13. Critical load vs. lamina orientation of laminates 1 and 2 for the cruciform
cross-section cantilever beam corresponding to the bending mode.
Fig. 10. Curves load vs. twisting of the free end for channel cross-section cantilever
beam.
Table 1
Results for the channel cross-section cantilever beam.
Case Laminates lay-up d (mm) y
s
(mm)
GJ (Nmm
2
) EJ
oo
(Nmm
4
)
1 1-[01/01]
s
32.18 37.01 0.11598E+8 0.21899E+13
2-[01/01]
s
2 1-[451/451]
s
32.18 37.01 0.17216E+8 0.11275E+13
2-[451/451]
s
3 1-[01/01]
s
29.34 41.05 0.13342E+8 0.19628E+13
2-[451/451]
s
4 1-[451/451]
s
35.83 31.37 0.15432E+8 0.13214E+13
2-[01/01]
s
J.E.B. Cardoso et al. / Thin-Walled Structures 47 (2009) 13631372 1369
The Fig. 12 shows the relation between the normalized applied
load and the normalized tip displacement in the perturbation
force direction. We may verify that the critical load value obtained
corresponds to the theoretical one.
The inuence of the lamina orientation of the laminates 1 and
2 on the critical load is shown in Fig. 13. The dashed curve
represents the variation of the critical load vs. lamina orientation
of laminate 1, keeping the lamina orientation of laminated 2 equal
to 01. The continuous curve represents the variation of the critical
load vs. lamina orientation of laminate 2, keeping the lamina
orientation of laminated 1 equal to 01.
From Fig. 13, we verify that when laminate 1 is unidirectional
(01), the critical load varies between F
cr
3110N, for an unidirec-
tional (01) conguration of the laminate 2, and F
cr
228N, when
conguration of laminate 2 is [90/90/90/90]
S
.
Keeping laminate 2 unidirectional (01), the inuence of lamina
orientation of the laminate 1 on the critical load is imperceptible
(dashed line). The value of the critical load is approximately
F
cr
3110N for any conguration of laminate 1. This was a
predictable situation, since the laminate 2 has a great contribution
to the bending stiffness of the cross-section, in contrast to
laminate 1, which contribution is insignicant.
In a second case, also for a cantilever beam, to determine the
critical load corresponding the torsion mode, a perturbation
moment M
x
/mm 0.001F is considered, as indicated in Fig. 14.
Considering the conguration [45/45/45/45]
S
for both
laminates, the theoretical critical load value obtained using Eq.
(23), where K
y
is the equivalency factor related to the Euler
column to torsion and EI
ps
is the polar bending stiffness related to
the shear center, is F
cr
21568N.
The Fig. 15 presents the variation of the tip twisting rotation
with the applied load normalized by the theoretical value. We
ARTICLE IN PRESS
x
y
z
A B F
x
2000
t = 2
1
0
0
60
M
x
= 0.001F
mm
2
1
y
z
Fig. 14. Cruciform cross-section cantilever beam and loading to evaluate the critical load corresponding to the torsional mode.
0.0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1.0
1.2
0.00
x [rad]
F
/
F
c
r
0.03 0.06 0.09 0.12 0.15
Fig. 15. Load vs. twisting curve for the cruciform cross-section cantilever beam
corresponding to the buckling torsion mode.
0
5
10
15
20
25
0
Lamina orientation []
C
r
i
t
i
c
a
l

L
o
a
d

[
K
N
]
15 30 45 60 75 90
Fig. 16. Critical load vs. lamina orientation of both laminates simultaneously for
the cruciform cross-section cantilever beam.
0.0E+00
2.0E+06
4.0E+06
6.0E+06
8.0E+06
1.0E+07
1.2E+07
1.4E+07
1.6E+07
0
Lamina orientation []
G
J

[
N
.
m
m
^
2
]
15 30 45 60 75 90
Fig. 17. Torsion stiffness vs. lamina orientation of both laminates simultaneously
for the cruciform cross-section.
0.0E+00
1.0E+09
2.0E+09
3.0E+09
4.0E+09
5.0E+09
6.0E+09
7.0E+09
8.0E+09
9.0E+09
1.0E+10
0
Lamina orientation []
E
J

[
N
.
m
m
^
4
]
15 30 45 60 75 90
Fig. 18. Warping property vs. lamina orientation of both laminates simultaneously
for the cruciform cross-section.
J.E.B. Cardoso et al. / Thin-Walled Structures 47 (2009) 13631372 1370
may verify that the critical load value obtained corresponds to the
theoretical one.
The variation of the critical load vs. lamina orientation of both
laminates simultaneous is presented in Fig. 16.
The Eq. (23) show the inuence of the torsion stiffness and
warping property terms on the beam critical load. Taking the
properties of the unidirectional (01) laminate as reference in this
case, where the beam length is L 2000mm, we may conclude
that the torsion stiffness GJ 2:14 10
6
Nmm
2
has much
more inuence on the beam critical load than the term
p
2
EJ
oo
=K
2
y
L
2
0:0058 10
6
Nmm
2
corresponding to the
warping property.
The Figs. 17 and 18 show, respectively, the variation of the
torsion stiffness and warping property with the lamina
orientation of both laminates simultaneously. Comparing Figs.
16 and 17, we conclude that the variation of the critical load
follows the same trajectory as the variation of the torsion stiffness.
Now, the critical load and the post-buckling path are
determined for a clampedclamped (Fig. 19a) and a
clampedsimple supported beam (Fig. 19b), considering the
conguration [45/45/45/45]
S
for both laminates. The
nonlinear response is represented, respectively, in Fig. 20a and
b, where the curves were normalized with respect to the
theoretical critical load values obtained by the Eq. (23) and to
the mid-span displacement. These values are F
cr
6314.7N and
F
cr
3321.8N for the clampedclamped beam and for the
clampedsimple supported beam, respectively. The gures show
a good agreement between numerical and theoretical values.
7. Concluding remarks
A nite element model for structural analysis of composite
laminated thin-walled beam structures with geometrically non-
linear behavior, based on an updated Lagrangean formulation, has
been presented. Warping deformation is included. To dene the
loaddeection path, a generalized displacement control method
has been implemented. The thin-walled cross-sections are
modeled as assemblies of at symmetric laminated panels and
their bending-torsion properties are dened in terms of the cross-
section geometry, warping function and properties of the
corresponding laminate at each point. The cross-section geometry
is discretized by quadratic isoparametric nite elements to
determine its bending-torsion properties. The structural beam
modeling is formulated throughout three-dimensional two-node
hermitean nite beam elements.
The warping function is dependent not only on the cross-
section geometry but as well as on the cross-section material
distribution.
The critical load for an isotropic cross-section beam has been
calculated and is in agreement with its theoretical value. The
inuence of the lamina orientation on the structural behavior as
well as on the critical load of composite laminated beams has
been studied. As one expected, the critical load of laminate
composite beam is strongly dependent on the lamina orientation,
hence this orientation is a fundamental parameter to these
structures. Also, the bending mode critical load variation vs.
lamina orientation follows nearly the same trajectory as the
variation of the laminate equivalent membrane longitudinal
modulus. On the other hand, the torsion mode critical load
variation vs. lamina orientation follows nearly the same trajectory
as the variation of the St. Venant torsion stiffness.
References
[1] Vlasov VZ. Thin-walled elastic beams. Israel Program for Scientic Transla-
tions, Jerusalem; 1961.
ARTICLE IN PRESS
x
y
z
1000
A
B
F
y
= 0.001F
F
x
C
1000
A B
F
y
= 0.001F
F
x
C
Fig. 19. Cruciform cross-section beam and loading to evaluate the critical load corresponding to the bending mode; (a) clampedclamped and (b) clampedsimple
supported.
Fig. 20. Load vs. displacement curves for the cruciform cross-section beam corresponding to the bending mode; (a) clampedclamped and (b) clampedsimple supported.
J.E.B. Cardoso et al. / Thin-Walled Structures 47 (2009) 13631372 1371
[2] Barsoum RS, Gallagher RH. Finite element analysis of torsional and torsional-
exural stability problems. International Journal for Numerical Methods in
Engineering 1970;2:33552.
[3] Bazant ZP, El Nimeiri M. Large deection spatial buckling of thin walled
beams and frames. Journal of Engineering Mechanics Division
1973;99(EM6):125981.
[4] Chen WF, Atsuta T. Theory of beam-columnsvolume 2: space behavior and
design. New York: McGraw-Hill; 1977.
[5] Pittaluga A. Recent developments in the theory of thin walled beams.
Computers and Structures 1978;3:6979.
[6] Cardoso JB, Soares CAM. Finite element structural analysis based on the
Vlasov beam theory. Second National Symposium of Theoretical and Applied
Mechanics, 1979, Lisbon, Portugal.
[7] Soares CAM, Cardoso JB. Finite element dynamic analysis of structures based
on the Vlasov beam theory. Euromech 122, 1979. Numerical Analysis of the
Dynamics of Ship Structures, Paris, France.
[8] Gjelsvik A. The theory of thin-walled beams. New York: Wiley; 1981.
[9] Meek JL, Ho PTS. A simple nite element for warping torsion problem.
Computer Methods in Applied Mechanics and Engineering 1983;37:2536.
[10] Roberts TM, Azizian ZG. Nonlinear analysis of thin walled bars of open cross-
section. International Journal of Mechanical Sciences 1983;25:56577.
[11] Murray N. Introduction to the theory of thin-walled structures. Oxford:
Claredon Press; 1984.
[12] Attard MM. Nonlinear theory of non-uniform torsion of thin-walled open
beams. Thin-Walled Structures 1986;4:10134.
[13] Gendy A, Saleeb A, Chang T. Generalized thin-walled beam models for
exural-torsional analysis. Computers and Structures 1992;42(4):53150.
[14] Pi YL, Bradford MA. Effects of approximations in analyses of beams of open
thin-walled cross-sectionpart I: exure-torsional stability. International
Journal of Numerical Methods in Engineering 2001;51:75772.
[15] Pi YL, Bradford MA. Effects of approximations in analyses of beams of open
thin-walled cross-sectionpart II: 3-D non-linear behaviour. International
Journal of Numerical Methods in Engineering 2001;51:77390.
[16] Mohri F, Azrar L, Potier-Ferry M. Lateral post-buckling analysis of thin-walled
open sections beams. Thin Walled Structures 2002;40:101336.
[17] Lee J. Center of gravity and shear center of thin-walled open-section
composite beams. Composite Structures 2001;52:25560.
[18] Valido A, Cardoso JB. Design sensitivity analysis of composite thin-walled beam
cross-sections. In: Proceedings of sixth WCSMO 2005, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil.
[19] Rajasekaran S. Mechanical properties of thin-walled composite beams of
generic open and closed sections. Structural Engineering and Mechanics
2005;21(5):591620.
[20] Rand O. Fundamental closed-form solutions for solid and thin-walled
composite beams including a complete out-of-plane warping model.
International Journal Solids and Structures 1998;35(21):277593.
[21] Rand O. Similarities between solid and thin-walled composite beams by
analytic approach. Journal of Aircraft 1998;35(4):60415.
[22] Bauld N, Tzeng L. AVlasov theory for ber-reinforced beams with thin-walled
open cross sections. International Journal Solids and Structures
1984;20(3):27797.
[23] Wu XX, Sun CT. Simplied theory for composite thin-walled beams. AIAA
Journal 1992;30(12):294551.
[24] Tauk A, Barrace JJ, Lorin F. Composite beam analysis with arbitrary cross-
section. Computers and Structures 1999;44:18994.
[25] Yu W, Hodges DH, Volovoi VV, Fuchs ED. A generalized Vlasov theory for
composite beams. Thin-Walled Structures 2005;43:1493511.
[26] Bhaskar K, Librescu L. A geometrically non-linear theory for laminated
anisotropic thin-walled beams. International Journal of Engineering Science
1995;33(9):133144.
[27] Lee J, Kim S. Flexural-torsional buckling of thin-walled I-section composites.
Computers and Structures 2001;79:98795.
[28] Kabir M, Sherbourne A. Optimal bre orientation in lateral stability of
laminated channel section beams. Composites: Part B 1998;29B:817.
[29] Fraternali F, Feo L. On a moderate rotation of thin-walled composite beams.
Composites: Part B 2000;31:14158.
[30] Lee J, Lee S. Flexural-torsional behavior of thin-walled composite beams.
Thin-Walled Structures 2004;42:1293305.
[31] Cardoso JB, Benedito NM, Valido AJ. Finite element analysis of geometrically
nonlinear thin-walled composite laminated beams. Technical report, Depart-
ment of Mechanical Engineering, Instituto Superior Te cnico, Lisboa, Portugal,
2006.
[32] Cesnik CE, Sutyrin VG, Hodges D. Cross-sectional analysis of composite beams
including large initial twist and curvature effects. AIAA Journal
1996;34(9):191320.
[33] Yu W, Volovoi VV, Hodges DH, Hong X. Validation of the variational
asymptotic beam sectional analysis. AIAA Journal 2002;40(10):210512.
[34] Kim NI, Shin DK, Kim MY. Improved exural-torsional stability analysis of
thin-walled composite beam and exact stiffness matrix. International Journal
of Mechanical Sciences 2007;49(8):95069.
[35] Kolla r LP. Flexural-torsional buckling of open section composite columns with
shear deformation. International Journal of Solids and Structures 2001;
38(4243):752541.
[36] Sapka s A

, Kolla r LP. Lateral-torsional buckling of composite beams. Interna-

tional Journal of Solids and Structures 2002;39(11):293963.
[37] Machado SP, Cortnez VH. Non-linear model for stability of thin-walled
composite beams with shear deformation. Thin-Walled Structures
2005;43(10):161545.
[38] Cortnez VH, Piovan MT. Stability of composite thin-walled beams with shear
deformability. Computers and Structures 2006;84(1516):97890.
[39] Piovan MT, Cortnez VH. Mechanics of shear deformable thin-walled beams
made of composite materials. Thin-Walled Structures 2007;45(1):3762.
[40] Yang Y, Kuo S. Theory & analysis of nonlinear framed structures. Englewood
Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall; 1994.
[41] Valido AJ, Cardoso JB. Geometrically nonlinear composite beam struc-
turesdesign sensitivity analysis. Engineering Optimization 2003;35(5):
53151.
[42] Cardoso JB, Sousa L, Valido AJ. Optimal design of path-dependent nonlinear
structures with critical and post-critical behaviour. CIMS 2000: 65158. In:
Proceedings of third International Conference on Coupled Instabilities in
Metal Structures, Lisbon, Portugal.
[43] Sousa L, Cardoso JB, Valido AJ. Optimal design of elastic-plastic structures
with post-critical behaviour. Structural Optimization 1999;17(23):14754.
[44] Bathe K. Finite element procedures in engineering analysis. Englewood Cliffs,
NJ: Prentice-Hall; 1982.
[45] Tsai SW. Theory of composites design. Think Composites 1992.
[46] Turkalj G, Brnic J, Prpic-Orsic J. Large rotation analysis of elastic thin-walled
beam-type structures using ESA approach. Computers and Structures
2003;81:185164.
ARTICLE IN PRESS
J.E.B. Cardoso et al. / Thin-Walled Structures 47 (2009) 13631372 1372