International Journal of Mechanical Sciences 74 (2013) 114

Contents lists available at SciVerse ScienceDirect

International Journal of Mechanical Sciences

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/ijmecsci

An accurate nonlinear 3d Timoshenko beam element based

on Hu-Washizu functional
Ozan Soydas n, Afsin Saritas
Department of Civil Engineering, Middle East Technical University, Ankara 06800, Turkey

art ic l e i nf o a b s t r a c t

Article history: An accurate 3d mixed beam element that is efcient especially in nonlinear analysis is presented in this
Received 24 December 2012 paper. The mathematical theory is based on Hu-Washizu principle that uses three-elds in the
Received in revised form variational form. The composition of the variational form ensures independent selection of displacement,
7 April 2013
stress and strain elds. Timoshenko beam theory is extended to three dimensions for deriving strains
Accepted 19 April 2013
Available online 1 May 2013
from displacement eld. Numerical integration of stressstrain relations along control sections is carried
out for numerical analysis. The nite element approximation for the beam uses shape functions for
Keywords: section forces that satisfy equilibrium and discontinuous section deformations along the control sections
Beam nite element of the beam. This form of the element permits coupling of the stress resultants and eliminates necessity
Mixed formulation
of displacement components along the beam element except at the nodes. Consequently the element is
Hu-Washizu variational
free from shear-locking. Numerical examples on uniform and tapered structural members with solid and
Shear locking
Torsion hollow circular sections demonstrate the nonlinear interaction between axial, shear force, bending
Circular sections moments and torsion, where the results compare well with closed form solutions and available data in
literature. Furthermore, the proposed element has superior performance in both linear and nonlinear
analysis compared to a locking-free higher order displacement based 3d Timoshenko beam element.
& 2013 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

1. Introduction element. An important drawback of utilization of the strain compo-

A beam element can be simply dened as a line on which all
structural properties are condensed and this peculiarity of it
facilitates analysis of systems composed of beam elements. How-
ever, the assumption of condensation of structural properties from
three dimensions to one dimension may take away the accuracy
needed for nonlinear analysis of important types of structural
systems like pier of a deck or load carrying skeleton of a frame
building under severe earthquake loading unless the properties in
three dimensions are conserved. Therefore, beam nite elements
that are capable of embodying axial, bending, shear and torsion
effects with a considerable accuracy are needed to be developed
for nonlinear analyses.
Material nonlinearity of beams can be modeled by assuming
concentrated or distributed inelasticity on the beam element. Con-
centrated inelasticity necessitates utilization of hinges that lump
nonlinearity at each end of the beam whereas in order to capture
distributed inelasticity, control sections composed of plenty of bers
that are necessary for dening material constitutive relations are
used for accumulation of the distributed nonlinearity along the beam
n can solve that phenomena to some extent. Hughes et al. [1] offered
Corresponding author. Tel.: +90 312 210 5458; fax: +90 312 210 5401.
E-mail addresses: ozansoydas@gmail.com (O. Soydas),
asaritas@metu.edu.tr (A. Saritas).
nents that are perpendicular to the control sections of the beam in
distributed inelasticity is inability to capture coupling of section
forces unless a suitable element that eliminates this problem is not
beneted from.
There are two main methods called displacement based (stiffness)
and force based (exibility) approaches in deriving frame elements,
where latter approach also falls into the category of mixed nite
element method. Fields necessary for determination of the shape
functions differ and help distinguishing two approaches from each
other. However, ber discretization of control sections and integra-
tion of sectional properties along the beam element is common for
performing analysis with each approach.
Continuity of differential equations is violated in displacement
based elements. Therefore, assumed shape functions utilized for
interpolation of the displacement eld along the beam element
is only capable of ensuring the element equilibrium at the nodes.
As a result of violation of the continuity requirement, in order to
obtain reasonable values for section forces number of nodes per
element or order of shape functions should be increased which
will result in an increased computational effort. Moreover, this
nature of the displacement based elements may cause shear-
locking in thin beam limit although reduced integration methods
a reduced integration two-node element, for which integration of
shear terms are performed with interpolation functions having

0020-7403/$ - see front matter & 2013 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ijmecsci.2013.04.002
2 O. Soydas, A. Saritas / International Journal of Mechanical Sciences 74 (2013) 114
order less than the order of shape functions for bending, required
the use of at least two elements per span to obtain reasonable
results. Yokoyama [2] presented a Timoshenko beam element with
reduced integration, which has four nodes and two degrees of
freedom (dofs) per node. Although Yokoyama's proposed element
was able to eliminate shear locking, accuracy under linear elastic
response was still in question with the use of single element
discretization per span. A consistent interpolation element with
three nodes in total was proposed by Reddy [3]. This element had
two nodes at the ends with two dofs each and a middle node with
only the transverse deection as dof. Although this element solved
the locking problem, it still necessitated the use of several
elements per span under linear elastic conditions. Both locking
and accuracy problems of displacement based elements were
solved by the element proposed by Friedman and Kosmatka [4],
where the element had two end nodes and was formulated in 2d
by using Hamilton's principle and cubic and quadratic Lagrangian
shape functions for transverse and rotational displacements. The
shape functions in that study were made independent by requir-
ing them to satisfy the two homogenous differential equations
associated with Timoshenko's beam theory, and the shape func-
tions thus contain sectional geometric properties unlike the
standard nite element shape functions. With this element, the
response of a uniform prismatic beam under linear elastic condi-
tions was accurately modeled through single element discretiza-
tion per span. It should also be mentioned that the resulting
element stiffness matrix with the use of these shape functions
were earlier presented by Przemieniecki [5]. The beam nite
element developed by Friedman and Kosmatka was later used by
Mazars et al. [6] for the nonlinear analysis and capacity assessment
of reinforced concrete columns and slender walls, where the effect
of shear force and torsion was assumed to be uncoupled. In a
recent study, Triantafyllou and Koumousis [7] developed a locking-
free 2d displacement based beam nite element, where the shape
functions were derived under linear elastic material behavior
similar to the effort presented by Friedman and Kosmatka [4].
The beam element proposed in that study was used to analyze
structural members where shear effects were signicant under
nonlinear material response.
Last two decades witnessed the rise of mixed beam nite
elements due to the computational issues faced with displacement
based elements. In mixed nite elements, independent stress and
strain elds are utilized in addition to the displacement eld in the
variational form of the element, thereby relaxing the strong
satisfaction of the problem solution statements faced in the
displacement based elements derived from minimum potential
energy principle (Table 1, where meaning of the symbols are given
in the derivation of the proposed beam element later in this
paper). Mixed elements are advantageous compared to
Table 1
Strong and weak satisfaction of parameters in variational principles.
Varied elds Functional name Strong satisfaction Weak satisfaction
u Potential energy u on
s
div r b 0 on
r r on t tn on t
u un on u
u; r HellingerReissner s u on div r b 0 on
u un on u r r on
t tn on t
u; r; Hu-Washizu - div r b 0 on
s u on
r r on
u un on u
t tn on t
displacement based elements since they do not need to cope with
shear or membrane locking, and they yield accurate results with
lesser number of elements under nonlinear conditions [8]. In a
recent study of Saritas and Soydas [9], the accuracy and robustness
of the mixed nite elements compared to the displacement based
elements were presented in detail with examples.
The keystone and highly cited study in the development and
use of mixed beam nite elements under nonlinear conditions is
the paper by Spacone et al. [10]. In that study, HellingerReissner
principle was used in the derivation of an EulerBernoulli beam
nite element for the analysis and capacity assessment of rein-
forced concrete columns; thus only axial force and bending
moment interaction was considered. De Souza [11] presented a
3d EulerBernoulli beam element through the use of Hellinger
Reissner principle, where moderate displacements were taken into
account along element length and large displacements and rota-
tions at the nodes were considered through corotational formula-
tion [12]. Nukala and White [13] developed a 3d EulerBernoulli
beam nite element based on HellingerReissner variational
principle for nonlinear analysis of steel frames having open-
walled cross-section by including nite rotations and warping of
the cross-section due to torsion. In that study, nonlinear material
behavior was obtained by a decoupled response of axial stress and
shear stress through the use of a two-space Von Mises constitutive
relation, where the element cross-section included the axial stress
due to axial force, biaxial bending and bimoment, and the shear
stress due to uniform torsion only, thus shear force effect was
neglected.
A two dimensional Timoshenko mixed beam element free from
shear-locking formed by utilization of the three-eld Hu-Washizu
variational was proposed by Taylor et al. [8] by assuming the effect
of shear is linear elastic and uncoupled from axial force and
bending moment. In a successor study, Saritas and Filippou [14]
developed a 2d mixed element that considers the interaction of
axial force, shear force and moment, where the reliability of the
element with regards to experimental data was veried with steel
shear link elements [15] and reinforced concrete members [16].
Recently, Papachristidis et al. [17] proposed a 3d Timoshenko
mixed element for the capacity assessment of frame structures
under high shear based on natural mode method [18] that
incorporates axial force, shear force, bending moment and torsion
to the element formulation. However, in that study the interaction
between internal forces for the 3d beam element was not
demonstrated. Furthermore, Wackerfuss and Gruttman [19] devel-
oped a three dimensional frame element by using Hu-Washizu
variational for beams with arbitrary cross-section and nonlinear
behavior was modeled by dening additional deformation modes
for warping and deformations in the transverse direction of each
nodes of the element. Verication studies in the latter paper
comprised mostly of linear material and nonlinear geometric
responses of members and thus did not provide verication of
the nonlinear interaction between 3d sectional forces present in
the element.
In this study, three eld Hu-Washizu variational principle is
used to develop a 3d Timoshenko mixed beam nite element that
considers the interaction of axial force, shear force, biaxial bending
moments and torsion through monitoring of responses over
several control sections along element length and with the ber
discretization of the section. Shape functions that satisfy equili-
brium and discontinuous strains are used for section resultants for
the nite element approximation. This nature of the element
eliminates the necessity of displacement interpolations along the
element length except at the nodes. Nonlinear interaction
between normal and shearing stresses is achieved with the use
of an inelastic 3d material model. Nonlinear analyses of uniform or
tapered members with solid and hollow circular sections are
 O. Soydas, A. Saritas / International Journal of Mechanical Sciences 74 (2013) 114 3

performed and the proposed 3d Timoshenko mixed element is an input in order to determine the unit vector in the direction of Z
compared with various 3d frame elements under nonlinear con- axis, z from the cross product z x  y . The unit vector in the
ditions, as well as with closed form solutions available in the direction of the X axis, x formed by the difference between global
literature. It is observed that the most signicant advantage of the coordinates (X,Y,Z) of nodes i and j is found as;
proposed beam element is its high accuracy through the use of 0 1
X j X i T
single element discretization per span thereby reducing the 1B C
computational burden of the extra elds necessary in the for- x @ Y j Y i A 2
L
mulation of the mixed nite elements and furthermore the Z j Z i
element can also accurately simulate the linear and nonlinear
Determination of the unit vectors is necessary to generate
responses of tapered members without the need for the derivation
rotation matrix, ar that relates displacement dofs of the element
of new shape functions.
in local coordinates, u to global coordinates, uel linearly as follows;
 T
u u1 u2 u3 u4 u5 u6 u7 u8 u9 u10 u11 u12 3
2. Three dimensional mixed beam element
 T
uel u1 u2 u3 u4 u5 u6 u7 u8 u9 u10 u11 u12
2.1. Coordinate Systems and Transformations
4
The beam has a right handed coordinate system both on local
u ar uel 5
and global level. The global (X,Y,Z) and local (x,y,z) coordinate
systems have both orthogonal axes. The local x-axis is oriented 2 3
M rot 0 0 0
from the starting node i to end node j such that y-axis is in the 6 0
6 M rot 0 0 7 7
same plane with the x-axis and z-axis points out perpendicularly ar 6 7 6
4 0 0 M rot 0 5
to the planes formed by x and y axes. Forces and displacements in
the direction of positive axes are considered to be positive. An 0 0 0 M rot
accent sign is used for variables in local axis. Moreover, double
headed arrows are utilized in order to distinguish moments and M rot x y z T 7
rotations from forces and axial displacements.
Number of element end forces that are shown with the letter
p followed by a numbered subscript in Fig. 1a can be reduced
from 12 to 6 by replacing them with interdependent basic element
forces, q in Fig. 1b and following relationship is obtained in matrix
form with the transformation matrix, a for an element with
length, L
p aT q
0 1 2 3
p1 1 0 0 0 0 0
Bp C 6 7
B 2 C 6 0 1=L 1=L 0 0 07
B C 6 7
B p3 C 6 0 0 0 0 1=L 1=L 7
B C 6 70 1 Global to Local
Bp C 6 7
B 4 C 6 0 0 0 1 0 0 7 q1
B C 6 7B C
B p5 C 6 0 0 7
B C 6 0 0 0 1 7B q2 C u = a r u el
B C 6 7B C
B p6 C 6 0 1 0 0 0 0 7B q3 C
B C 6 7B C
where B p7 C 6 1 0 7
B C
B C 6 0 0 0 0 7B q 4 C
B
C
B C 6 7
B p8 C 6 0 1=L 1=L 0 0 0 7B q C
B C 6 7@ 5 A
Bp C 6 0 1=L 7
B 9 C 6 0 0 0 1=L 7 q6
B C 6 7
B p10 C 6 0 0 0 1 0 0 7 Local to Basic
B C 6 7
Bp C 6 0 0 0 0 0 1 7 v = aar uel = a g u el
@ 11 A 4 5
p12 0 0 1 0 0 0
1
There are 6 dofs at each node i and j in a 3d coordinate system
totaling to 12 for an element as depicted in Fig. 2. The coordinate
of a point that does not exist on the line connecting nodes i and j is
the unit vector in the direction of Y axis, y and should be given as Fig. 2. Transformation of element displacements to deformations.

Y L Y, y L

p4 p1 X p7 p10 q4
q4 q1 X , x q1
Z i j Z ,z i j
p9 q5 + q6
p3 L
p12 p8 q5 + q6 q2 + q3
p2 q2 + q3 q3
p6 L L
L
p11 q2
p5 q5 q6

Fig. 1. Free body diagram of the beam element. (a) Element end forces and (b) Basic element forces.
4 O. Soydas, A. Saritas / International Journal of Mechanical Sciences 74 (2013) 114

Since 12 dofs are composed of 6 rigid body modes and u can be derived from Eq. (12) for small strains as follows;
6 deformations modes of displacement it is possible to relate basic 8 0 0
9
uxx dux x;y;z
0
>
> u xyz x zy x >
>
element deformation vector, v to displacements as follows; >
< dx >
=
dux x;y;z duy x;y;z 0 0
u
u
xy dy
dx
z x v x z x x 13
v au aar uel ag uel 8 >
> >
>
: u dux x;y;z duz x;y;z y x w0 x yx 0 x >
> ;
xz dz dx

Strain terms, uyy , uzz and uyz are equal to zero as a result of the
2.2. Hu-Washizu functional derivation, hence do not take part in the strain vector. In Eq. (12),
ux x; y; z, uy x; y; z and uz x; y; z are the displacements in x, y and z
Hu-Washizu [20] principle is a functional of three independent directions, respectively of any point in the section and ux is the
elds of stress eld r, strain eld , and displacement eld, u displacement of the point (x,0,0) along x-axis, vx and wx are the
dened as follows: transverse deections of the point (x,0,0) from x-axis in y and z
Z Z directions, respectively. x x, y x and z x are the small rotations
HW r;;u Wd rT u d ext 9 of the beam cross section around three orthogonal axes x, y and z,
respectively. Consequently, vector of displacements at a section of
In Eq. (9), stresses can be derived from the strain energy the beam, us is formed as;
function, W as follows: h iT
us ux vx wx x x y x z x 14
W
^
r 10 Strain elds for the beam are selected independently from

those in Eq. (13) as follows;
Strain vector that is derived from the displacements, u is 8 9 8 9
denoted by u and it is the symmetric part of the displacement < xx >
> = > < a xyz x z y x >
=
gradient, u u uT for small strains. Potential energy of the xy y xzx 15
>
: ; : > > >
;
external loading, ext due to body forces and displacement and xz z x yx
traction boundary conditions is dened as;
a x, y x and z x are the axial strain and curvature around y and
Z Z Z
  z axes, respectively. y xand z x are the shear distortions of the
ext uT bd uT tn d tT uun d 11 section in y and z directions, respectively. x is the angle of twist
t u
of the cross section. Consequently, vector of section deformations,
In Eq. (11), stresses caused by body forces are denoted by b. Dot ex is formed as
product of the stress vector with the outward normal n to the h iT
boundary gives stresses caused by the traction, t rn. Super- ex a x z x y x y x z x x 16
script asterisks near t and u designate imposed or in other words
known values in the formulation. It is assumed that the external
loading is conservative which implies that the work done depends 2.4. Section stress resultants and deformations
only on the nal displacement values of u. Integrations are carried
out in the domains of the body and traction and displacement Section stress resultants vector, sx for a 3d beam element is
boundaries are , t and u , respectively. formed as in Eq. (17) and section stress resultants can be computed
by taking integration over the section area, A as in Eq. (18).
h iT
sx Nx M z x M y x V y x V z x Tx 17
2.3. Kinematic relations for the 3d Timoshenko beam element
R R R
N A sxx dA M y A zsxx dA M z A ysxx dA
There are two basic beam theories named as EulerBernoulli
Axial force Moment about y axis Moment about z axis
(EBT) and Timoshenko beam theories (TBT). EBT is the simplest R R R
V y A sxy dA V z A sxz dA T A zsxy ysxz dA
one since it considers axial and exural effects in the section but Shear force in y direction Shear force in z direction Torsion around x axis
does not take into account shear effects due to the assumption
that section plane remains normal to the beam tangential axis 18
after the deformation of the section. TBT incorporates shear Basic element force vector, q and section stress resultants
deformations by assuming constant shear stress in the section vector, sx can be related to each other by utilizing element
and section plane is no more normal to the axis of the beam. equilibrium equations by neglecting any traction along the beam
Constant shear assumption necessitates utilization of a shear element as follows;
correction factor to calculate shear force in the section correctly
sx bxq 19
[21]; however this limitation can be overcome by using higher
order shape functions for shear deformation in the section [22]. In Eq. (19), bx is matrix of force interpolation functions
Kinematic relations of TBT are preferred in this study since it dened as in Eq. (20) and also relates section deformations, ex
ensures the accuracy needed with an increased computational to element deformations, v as given in Eq. (21).
efciency. 2 3
1 0 0 0 0 0
Three eld variational principle of Hu-Washizu functional 6 0 x 1 x=L 0 0 0 7
6 L 7
presented in Eq. (9) enables specication of and u independently. 6 7
60 0 0 0 L 1 x=L 7
x
Therefore kinematic relations can be dened independent from 6
bx 6 7 20
6 0 1=L 1=L 0 0 0 77
the assumed displacement eld for the beam. Timoshenko beam 6 7
theory is extended for a three dimensional geometry as follows: 40 0 0 0 1=L 1=L 5
8 9 8 9 0 0 0 1 0 0
< ux x; y; z >
> < uxyz x zy x >
= > = Z
u uy x; y; z vxzx x 12 L
T
> >
: u x; y; z ; :> >
; v b xexdx 21
z wx yx x 0
 O. Soydas, A. Saritas / International Journal of Mechanical Sciences 74 (2013) 114 5

2.5. Variation of Hu-Washizu functional expression is as follows;

Z L
 0 0    L
Computation of the variation of the functional in Eq. (9) gives Nu x u xNuxnx dx Nux uxN 
Z Z Z 0 0
Z L
^
HW sd rT u d rT u d ext  0 

N ux uxN0 nx dx 25
0
22
Z L  0 0 
Eq. (10) is based on a strain-energy function that is in M z z x z xM z V y z xz xV y dx
0
accordance with Cauchy elastic material model. However, general-
  L
ization to an inelastic material can also be made by assuming s ^ M z z x z xM z 
represents an inelastic material ensuring Eq. (22) is valid for any 0
Z L
type of material.  
M z V y z x z xM z0 V y dx
0
26
Eqs. (13), (15) and (18) are substituted into Eq. (22) and 0
integration is carried out along the length of the beam as follows; Z
Z Ln
L  0 0 
_ _ _ o M y y x y xM y V z y x y xV z dx
HW a xNN z xM z M z y xM y M y dx 0
0   L
Z L n o M y y x y xM y 
_ _ _ 0
y xV y V y z xV z V z xT T dx Z L
0  
Z M y0 V z y x y xM y0 V z dx 27
L  0 0 0
Nu xa x M z z xz x
Z
 L
0
Z
L
0  0  
 0
L  0 V z w x w xV z qz xwx dx V z wx wxV z 
M y y xy x dx V y v xz x y x 0 0
0
 Z L
0 0  0 
V z w x y x z x Tx xx dx V z wx wxV z0 qz x dx 28
Z L 0
 0 0 0 
u xN z xM z y xM y dx Z
0
L
0
n 0
o   L
Z V y v x v xV y qy xvx dx V y wx vxV y 
L  0 0

0
v xz xV y w x y xV z
0
Z Ln o
0 0
0 V y vx vxV y qy x dx 29
0  0
x xT dx ext 23
Z
_ _ _ _ _ _
In Eq. (23),N , M y , M z , T , V y and V z are calculated similarly to 0
L     L
Tx x x0 xTmx x x x dx Tx x x xT 
the section stress resultants in Eq. (18). In this case, section 0 0
Z Ln o
stresses with hat ^ sign, _ s xx , _
s xy and _ s xz are derived from the 0 0
T x x x xT mx x dx 30
material constitutive relations. It should also be noted that for 3d 0
beam element syy szz _ s yy _ s zz _s yz yz 0.
Careful examination of Eqs. (25) to (30) reveals that if there can
ext is the variation of the work-conjugate of the displacement
be found suitable approximation functions for the section forces
and stress resultant elds. Moment tractions around y and z axes
and their variations such that the integral terms on the right hand
are negligible in real structural engineering problems, therefore it
sides of those equations equal to zero, then there will be no need
is assumed that my x mz x 0. If body forces are also neglected,
to approximate the displacements u, v, w, x , y and z along the
then
beam. Nodal displacement values shown in Fig. 4 will be enough
Z L n o to calculate the denite integrals of the Eqs. (25) to (30). Therefore,
ext nxux qy xvx qz xwx mx xx x dxbc
0 following equation sets should be satised to meet that condition.
24 0
N x nx 0 V y0 x qy x 0 M z0 x V y x 0
31
nx and qy x, qz x are distributions of longitudinal tractions and 0
T x mx x 0 V z0 x qz x 0 M y0 xV z x 0
transverse tractions along x, y and z axes, respectively; mx x is
moment traction around x axis as depicted in Fig. 3. bc is the 0
N x 0 V y0 x 0 M z0 x V y x 0
variation of the energy due to boundary conditions. 0 32
T x 0 V z0 x 0 M y0 xV z x 0

2.6. Finite element approximation If it is assumed that axial and transverse tractions are constant
such that nx wx , qy x wy , qz x wz and mx x mx , then
If Eq. (24) is substituted into Eq. (23), integration by parts of all
terms with derivatives on the displacement elds of the resulting

y
q y( x )
m x ( x)
n (x )
x

qz ( x )
z

Fig. 3. Traction forces on beam element. Fig. 4. Nodal displacements for an element in local coordinates.
6 O. Soydas, A. Saritas / International Journal of Mechanical Sciences 74 (2013) 114

solution of Equation sets (31) and (32) gives revised version of the structure assembly process. However, a more practical approach
Eq. (19) as follows: would be to condense out all internal variables other than nodal
sx bxq sp x 33 displacements and thus keep them as internal parameters to the
element only. By this approach, the condensed response of the
In Eq. (33), sp x is the section stress resultant due to element element is readily implementable in a standard nite element
n oT
software that bases on the solution of structural nodal displace-
loading, w wx wy wz mx found as
2  x 3 ments. This choice also results in easier matrix computations due
L 1 L 0 0 0 to the reduction in structure stiffness matrix. Due to its practi-
6 x2 x
7
6 L2 78 cality, the latter solution approach for the mixed formulation nite
6 0 2 L L 0 0 7 wx 9
6  
7> >
6 7>> >
> elements is preferred in this paper. The condensation process of
6 0 0 L 2
x 2
x
0 7< w y = the element variables and the resulting solution algorithms with
sp x 6
6  2x
2 L L 7
7> w z >
6 L 7>> >
> this choice are presented in depth by Saritas and Soydas [9], where
6 0 2 1 L 0 0 7: ;
6  2x 7 mx the nal form of the equation is written as follows:
6 0 0 L 1 0 7
4 L  5 KU PPR 39
0 0 0 L 1 xL
34 where K is the structure stiffness matrix, U is the structure
displacement vector, P is the applied force vector for the structure,
Evaluation of right hand sides of Eqs. (25) to (30) at x 0 and and PR is the resisting force vector of the structure obtained by
x L gives; assemblage of the response of individual element resistances.

   L   L Nonlinear analysis of this form of the equation requires an
Nux uxN  M z z x z xM z  iterative process.
0 0
  L   L
M y y x y xM y  V z wx wxV z  2.7. Fiber discretization
0 0

  L   L
V y vx vxV y  Tx x x xT  Mixed beam element presented in this paper up to now is
0 0
derived in a general form for the nonlinear analysis of 3d structural
qT au uT aT quT pw 35 systems. Despite this generality, section types considered will focus
on solid and hollow circular sections for the purposes of verication
In Eq. (35), pw is the vector of rigid mode of applied tractions at
of the interaction of forces and furthermore for comparison with
the nodes and does not include the applied external loads at the
closed form solutions. Uniform and tapered structural members
nodes and dened as follows:

with circular sections have broad range of application area such as
pw wx L wy 2L wz 2L mx L 0 0 0 wy 2L wz 2L 0 0 0 pier of a deck, tower of wind turbines, pipelines, rotating shafts, etc.
and the following relations are derived for the section modeling of
36
the 3d mixed beam element.
Eq. (23) is rearranged in global displacements by using Eqs. (5), The relation between the strains at a ber point on the beam
(8), (16), (33) and (35) and ignoring bc until the assembly of the and the section deformations presented in Eq. (15) can be written
elements as follows: in an alternative form by dening section compatibility matrix as
Z L Z L as follows;
HW exT _
sxbxqsp xdxqT bxT exdx 2 3
1 y z 0 0 0
0 0
p
qT ag uel uTel aTg quTel aTr pw 37 6 z 7
as 4 0 0 0 ky 0 5 40
p
0 0 0 0 kz y
Minimization of Eq. (37) by equating the expression to zero
generally leads to a nonlinear equation and can be linearly
approximated by using rst order Taylor Series expansion as in xx xy xz T as ex 41
Eq. (38). As a result, three elds of the formulation are disassembled
In Eq. (40), ky and kz are the shear correction factors in y and z
in the equation. Basic element forces and section deformations are
directions, respectively and depend on section geometry and
internal variables that do not have to satisfy inter-element con-
material. These are introduced in the section compatibility matrix
tinuity requirements. Moreover, continuity requirements related
in order to estimate the shear strain energy accurately for the linear
with displacement eld are necessary to be satised only at the
elastic portion of element response. Shear correction factor for solid
inter-element nodes.
and hollow circular cross sections is the same about both axis
Z L
_ (denoted as k) and can be calculated from the general expression in
0 exT sxbxq qsp x ks xexdx
0 the study of Hutchinson [24] as given below in Eq. (42) for known
Z L 
outer radius, b, inner radius, a and Poisson ratio, .
qT bxT ex exdx ag uel uel
2
0 6a2 b 2 1 2 2
k
T
uel aTg q T
qar pw  38 7a4 34a2 b
2 4
7b 12a4
2 4 2 4
48a2 b 12b 2 4a4 16a2 b 4b
42
In order to ensure that Eq. (38) is satised for all arbitrary
values of uel , q, and ex, all values that are multiplied with It should be emphasized that higher-order elements such as
these terms should vanish for the equation to be equal to zero at the one derived recently by Zhang and Fu [25] that utilizes Laurent
all times. It is possible to solve Eq. (38) with nodal displacements, series expansion form for the displacement eld eliminates the
nodal forces and section deformation variables as dofs in the necessity of shear correction factor for solid and hollow circular
assembly of structure response. Such an approach was preferred sections. Furthermore, with an assumed distribution of shear
by Kutlu and Omurtag [23] in the formulation of a plate nite strain a priori in the mixed element formulation, it is also possible
element through HellingerReissner variational and with the to eliminate the need for shear correction factor as done by Saritas
choice of nodal displacements and nodal forces as dofs in the and Filippou [14].
 O. Soydas, A. Saritas / International Journal of Mechanical Sciences 74 (2013) 114 7

Eq. (40) can be utilized to rearrange Eq. (17) to carry out material stiffness matrix given as follows:
integration of stresses that satisfy the material constitutive rela- 2 3 2 3
C 1111 C 1112 C 1113 C 1122 C 1133
tions r^ r
^ as follows; 6C 7 6 7
0_ 1 km 4 1211 C 1212 C 1213 54 C 1222 C 1233 5
Z s xx C 1311 C 1312 C 1313 C 1322 C 1333
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ T B_ C
T
s N M z M y V y V z T as @ xy AdA s 43 " #1 " #
A _ C 2222 C 2233 C 2211 C 2212 C 2213
s xz  49
C 3322 C 3333 C 3311 C 3312 C 3313
If derivative of Eq. (43) with respect to section deformations is
taken, tangent stiffness of section, ks x that is needed to perform
Eq. (38) can be obtained as follows:
_ Z Z 3. Numerical verication of the element response
sx _r
ks x as T dA as T km as dA 44
ex A e A In this section, verication of the proposed 3d mixed beam
In Eq. (44), material tangent modulus, km is calculated as element is demonstrated by carrying out nonlinear analysis in four
follows; set of numerical examples. In the rst example, proposed 3d
mixed beam element is compared with the 3d version of the
_
r
km 45 element proposed by Friedman and Kosmatka [4] under mono-
e
tonic loading for a uniform cross-section cantilever member. The
Numerical integration methods such as Gauss-quadrature, 2d shape functions presented in the study of Friedman and
midpoint or trapezoidal rule can be performed on section for Kosmatka [4] are extended to 3d as presented by Luo [26] and
numerical integration of Eqs. (43) and (44). rearranged by making appropriate changes in accordance with the
coordinate system used in this study. In the second set of
2.8. 3d material model examples, the behavior of a uniform cross-section member under
pure torsion and under axial load combined with torque and the
Proposed mixed element has six stress components at a performance of a tapered member under pure torsion are inves-
material point of the cross-section. Normal and shear stresses tigated. In the third set of examples, the inuence of the coupling
(sxx , sxy and sxz ) have non-zero values whereas the rest of the of stresses and resulting forces in the element is demonstrated
stress components are equal to zero on the cross-section. Trans- through nonlinear analysis of beams with solid and hollow circular
verse stresses (syy and szz ) can be equated to zero in order to sections for a uniform cantilever member under varying levels of
linearize the residuals that will arise in Eq. (38) with respect to an axial and torsional loads and bended cyclically in 3d. In the last set
initial strain and an update scheme for the unknown transverse of examples, the study by Nowzartash and Mohareb [27] is
strain elds can be obtained as follows; considered, where the nonlinear interaction between bending
8 9
" #( ) ( ) " #> xx > and torsion and furthermore the inuence of shear force on
C 2222 C 2233 yy syy C 2211 C 2212 C 2213 < =
bending behavior are analyzed for a hollow circular section that
xy
C 3322 C 3333 zz szz >
C 3311 C 3312 C 3313 : > is xed at both ends. The results presented in that paper are
xz ;
compared through the use of proposed mixed beam element in
46 this paper.
In Eq. (46), C ijkl sij =kl is the tensor form of the consistent
tangent matrix for 3d material where i, j, k and l take values 1, 3.1. Example 1: comparison of nonlinear behavior of uniform mixed
2 and 3 that correspond to x, y and z, respectively. Transverse and displacement based elements
strain elds on the left hand side of the equation are updated until
the norm of the residuals is smaller than a specied tolerance by A cantilever steel member with solid circular cross-section that
the help of the strain values on the right hand side of the equation has orientations of local and global coordinates shown in Fig. 5a is
increments of which are obtained from the nite element analysis. loaded in the global X direction monotonically by imposing tip
Isotropy of the material enables setting syz sxz 0 by imposing displacement at the free end.
yz 0. The member is assumed to have a length, L of 180 units, cross-
The material stiffness for the beam formulation given in Eq. (45) section diameter, d of 18 units, Young modulus, E of 29,000 units,
is condensed for the non-zero stress components as follows: Poisson ratio, 0:3 and yield strength, fy of 36 units. Although
2 sxx sxx sxx 3 geometric and material variables are physically consistent, they
xx xy xz
6 sxy 7 are left intentionally as numerical to focus on the effect of the
6 sxy sxy 7
km 6 xx xy xz 7 47 applied loading. Material model that is used in the analysis for the
4 5
sxz sxz sxz response of steel is 3d J2 plasticity model, where kinematic and
xx xy xz
isotropic hardening values are both assumed as zero.
It is possible to assume sij C ijkl ij and separate the normal In order to perform numerical integration of the section
strain terms in transverse direction from others as follows; response, meshing of the circular cross-section is generated in
8 9 2 38 9 both radial and circumferential directions with the use of mid-
< sxx >
> = C 1111 C 1112 C 1113 >< xx > = point integration rule and by setting odd numbers 11 for both
6 7
sxy 4 C 1211 C 1212 C 1213 5 xy
> directions as shown in Fig. 5b. Although not presented in this
: s > ; >
C 1311 C 1312 C 1313 : xz ;
>
xz study, selected neness of the mesh on the section results in a
2 3
C 1122 C 1133 ( ) sufciently accurate nonlinear response. Five sections along the
6 7 yy element, i.e. 5 point Gauss quadrature rule is utilized to model the
4 C 1222 C 1233 5 48
zz aggregation of the response of the several sections along the beam
C 1322 C 1333
length.
Normal strain terms on the left hand side of Eq. (46) are In the following gure and discussions, the response of the
substituted into Eq. (48) for the converged state of the transverse proposed mixed formulation element and Friedman and Kosmatka
stresses syy szz 0 and the resulting expression is the condensed [4] displacement based element are denoted with MF and DB,
8 O. Soydas, A. Saritas / International Journal of Mechanical Sciences 74 (2013) 114

Fig. 5. Orientation of axes and radial and circumferential discretization of circular section. (a) Orientation of axes (b) Discretization of circular section (local coordinates) and
(c) Calculation of the shear stress.

respectively. It is observed that MF and DB are both free from 300

shear-locking and good at modeling linear behavior. Linear elastic
250
responses of MF and DB are not presented in current study since

Shear Force in X
both element formulations give exact behavior when the member 200
is made of uniform cross-section along element length. The only
150 DB ne=1
differences arise in the internal variations, and DF model in this DB ne=2
regards needs meshing. Under varying cross-sectional properties, 100 DB ne=4
it should be stated that MF still results in exact element response, DB ne=8
while DB requires mesh renement unless special care is directed 50 DB ne=16
MF ne=1
for the derivation of shape functions as done by Friedman and
0
Kosmatka [28], Murn and Kuti [29] and Shooshtari and Khajavi 0 2 4 6 8 10
[30]. By the way, such a comparison is presented for a tapered Displacement in X
member in the next example.
Fig. 6. Comparison of the effect of number of elements on the analysis of uniform
In order to study the convergence and accuracy of both MF and solid sections with DB and MF frame elements.
DB elements as part of this example, the effect of number of
integration points nIP that is necessary to perform integration
along the element is investigated rst. It is concluded that for both explicitly as follows:
MF and DB increasing nIP beyond 5 is not necessary because from
that number on nonlinear load-displacement curves nearly coin-
cide with each other indicating that the accuracy does not improve
any further. Then, the effect of number of elements ne on the
nonlinear behavior is investigated and it is observed that the use
of single element discretization is sufcient for MF under non-
linear behavior, while mesh renement is important for DB to
model nonlinear behavior accurately, as expected from a
displacement-based nite element. Fig. 6 points out that even
using 16 elements for DB cannot ensure the accuracy that is
provided by MF through the use of single element. Although the
duration for analysis is very close to each other for both DB and MF
with the use of same number of elements, MF necessitates
utilization of lesser number of elements which in turn results in
a reduced computation time compared to the analysis with DB.
This substantiates that proposed MF is superior to DB under
nonlinear conditions. For larger structural systems in 2d, such a
comparative study was conducted by the authors of this paper [9]
and it was found that the use of mixed formulation elements even
for large systems reduces the computation time besides increased
accuracy of results.
3.2. Example 2: nonlinear performance of mixed element under
torsion
3.2.1. Pure torsion of a uniform cantilever beam with solid circular
section
Derivation of the exact solution of the torque, T that is applied
to the free end of an elastoplastic uniform cantilever beam with
solid circular section is straightforward and can be obtained
! "   #
3
2b 1 y 3
T y 1 50
3 4
In Eq. (50), b is the outer radius as dened previously,y is the
shear stress at yield and y is the angle of twist at yield calculated
for the known shear modulus, G as follows:
y L
y 51
Gb
If is sufciently large, then T approaches to the torque, T p
indicating that the section is whole plastic as follows;
!
3
2b
Tp y 52
3
That circumstance is veried by applying pure torsion to the
free end of proposed MF element with the same geometric and
material properties in Example 1 and Fig. 7 is obtained. According
to the gure, MF matches quite well with the exact solution under
pure torsion with only one element. Moreover MF is also capable
of conrming the theoretical phenomenon that elastic limit is 75%
of the plastic limit for the circular section.
3.2.2. Combined axial load and torque on a uniform cantilever beam
with solid circular section
The effect of combined axial load and torque on a uniform
cantilever beam with solid circular section is investigated for the
MF element having same geometric and material properties as in
Example 1 by applying loading pattern dened in the study of
Gaydon [31]. In that study, Reuss equations are used to obtain
 O. Soydas, A. Saritas / International Journal of Mechanical Sciences 74 (2013) 114 9

explicit expressions for the plastic behavior of a cantilever beam

1.00 under different types of application of combined axial load and
torque. Such loading conditions are experienced in critical engi-
0.75 neering components, such as couplings, bolted joints and rotating
Elastic Limit
T/Tp

shafts [32].
0.50 MF with single element per span is given a certain extension
such that entire cylinder becomes plastic, i.e. the axial stress
0.25 exceeds the yield stress. Afterwards, the axial extension is kept
Theoretical
MF n e=1 constant and torsion is applied at the fee end of the member
0
0 1 2 3 4 5 increasing gradually. Variation of normalized axial load by axial
/y load at yield, N=N y and normalized torque by a multiple of torque
at yield, T=1:5T y (as presented by Gaydon) versus normalized
Fig. 7. Comparison of the exact solution and MF frame element under pure torsion
for solid circular section.
angle of twist are monitored as shown in Fig. 8. According to the
gure, axial load carrying capacity decreases after torque is
applied, reaching asymptotically to zero where the latter con-
1 verges to 2/3 in a synchronized manner. MF beam element obtains
T/(1.5Ty )
Axial Load
N/N y the closed form expressions provided by Gaydon [31] exactly.

0.8
N/N y and T/(1.5Ty )

T/(1.5Ty)=2/3

0.6 3.2.3. Comparison of nonlinear behavior of tapered Members under

torsion with mixed and displacement based elements
0.4
In this case, nonlinear analysis of DB and MF elements in

Torque
0.2
Example 1 having the same material and geometric properties at
one end but tapered to the other end is performed applying pure
0 torsion at the free end of the member. Member is assumed to be
1 2 3 4 5
tapered linearly having diameter d 18 at the xed end and d 9
/
y units at the free end of the member, respectively. Number of
Fig. 8. Variation of axial load and torque with angle of twist for solid circular
elements ne for DB that is used in the analysis is 2, 4 and 8,
section. Extension held constant. whereas it is only 1 for MF.
Although it is not shown in this study in above examples, a
uniform element analyzed with DB element implemented in this
9000
paper has similar response to MF under pure torsion and axial load
8000
combined with torque. However, this is not the case when the
7000
member becomes tapered. According to Fig. 9, number of elements
ne used for DB should be increased to more than 8 in order to
6000
capture an accurate response in both linear and nonlinear regions
Torque

5000
of response as compared to MF.
4000
3000 DB ne=2
2000 DB ne =4 3.3. Example 3: nonlinear analysis of uniform Beams with solid and
1000 DB ne=8 hollow circular Sections
MF ne =1
0
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5
The circular section beam from Example 1 is used with
Angle of Twist
identical geometry and material properties for the demonstration
Fig. 9. Comparison of the effect of number of elements for the analysis of tapered of the strong nonlinear coupling between internal forces in the
members with DB and MF frame elements. nonlinear analysis of beams with solid and hollow circular sections

0.25Ny 0.25Ny 0.25Ny 0.25Ny 0.25Ny

1
ux=6 uz=6
ux=6
0.5 uz=6
Load Factor

0
t=

i) t=0, No axial load, ii) t=0.1, 0.25Ny, iii) t=0.5, 0.25

iii 0.25Ny,
i)

0 ux=0, uz=0 ux=0, uz=0 ux=6, uz=0

ux=0 uz=0 ux=0 ux=0
uz=0 uz=0
Lo

-0.5 iiii) t=0.1 iii) t=0.5

iii iv) t=1 v) t=1.5 vi) t=2
=2

Forc
rce Hi
History
ry
-1 Disp History
ry X
Disp History
ry Z
0 0.5 1 1.5 2 iv) t=1 0.25Ny,
=1, 0.25 v) t=1.5, 0.25
0.25Ny, vi) t=2 0.25Ny,
=2, 0.25
Pseudo
udo Time (t) ux=6, uz=6 ux=0, uz=6 ux=0, uz=0

Fig. 10. Force and displacement pseudo-time histories imposed on the element. (a) Loading history for case A2. (b) Loading history for case A2 for 0.25Ny (Top view in the
negative global Y-direction).
10 O. Soydas, A. Saritas / International Journal of Mechanical Sciences 74 (2013) 114

in 3d. The member is this time only analyzed with the proposed
MF element by using single element per span and with the same
discretization presented in Example 1.
Two different pseudo-load cases called A and B that have four
sub-cases each are applied to the member. In case A, the member
is loaded axially at free end increasing gradually in the negative
global Y-direction (Force History in Fig. 10a) up to pseudo time,
t0.1 s and kept constant until t2 s. Applied axial load on the
member is assumed to be one of the following: 0, 0:25N y , 0:50N y
and 0:75N y , thus resulting in four sub-cases A1, A2, A3 and A4,
respectively. Axial force at yield, Ny is calculated as the area of the
section times yield strength of the member.
200
At t 0.1 s, free end of the member is started to be displaced
linearly until 6 units in global X-direction (Disp. History X in
Fig. 10a) until t 0.5 s and X coordinate is kept constant until
t1 s, displacing linearly in the negative X-direction from now on
until t1.5 s and having zero X coordinate until t 2 s.
At t 0.5 s, together with the Force History and Disp. History X,
free end of the member is started to be displaced linearly 6 units in
global Z-direction (Disp. History Z in Fig. 10a) until t 1 sec and Z
coordinate is kept constant until t 1.5 s. After that instant, free
end of the member is displaced linearly in the negative Z-direction
till t2 sec. In Fig. 10a, vertical axis named as load factor denes
the portion of the load or displacement imposed on the member at
that pseudo time. The displacement history imposed on the
element is presented in Fig. 10b. Nonlinear behavior originates
X 0*N (Case A1) from the inelasticity caused by the combination of the loading
y

150 X 0.25*N (Case A2) axially and movements in X and Z directions as depicted for solid
y
X 0.50*N y (Case A3) circular section in Figs. 11 and 12, respectively.
Shear Force in X

100
X 0.75*N (Case A4) In case B, same loading histories as in case A are considered,
y
50 where this time torsion is applied around global Y-direction
0 instead of axial force at the free end. Experiments for ductile
materials verify that the yield stress obtained from a torsion test is
-50
0.5 to 0.6 times that is determined from a simple tension test [33],
-100 and the use of Von Mises criterion in this regards gives an accurate
-150 estimate of the yield strength in shear. Therefore, in case B, torsion
-200
0 1 2 3 4 5 6
200 Z 0*T y (Case B1)
Displacement in X
150 Z 0.25*T y (Case B2)
Fig. 11. Base shear vs. tip displacement in global X-direction for cases A1, A2, A3 Z 0.50*T y (Case B3)
Shear Force in Z

and A4 for solid section. 100

Z 0.75*T y (Case B4)
50

0
200 Z 0*N y (Case A1)
-50
150 Z 0.25*N y (Case A2)
-100
Z 0.50*N y (Case A3)
Shear Force in Z

100
Z 0.75*N y (Case A4) -150
50
-200
0 0 1 2 3 4 5 6
-50 Displacement in Z
-100 Fig. 14. Base shear vs. tip displacement in global Z-direction for cases B1, B2, B3 and
-150 B4 for solid section.

-200
0 1 2 3 4 5 6
Displacement in Z
Fig. 12. Base shear vs. tip displacement in global Z-direction for cases A1, A2, A3
and A4 for solid section.

200 X 0*T y (Case B1)

150 X 0.25*T y (Case B2)

X 0.50*T y (Case B3)
Shear Force in X

100
X 0.75*T y (Case B4)
50

-50

-100

-150

-200

0 1 2 3 4 5 6
Displacement in X
Fig. 13. Base shear vs. tip displacement in global X-direction for cases B1, B2, B3
and B4 for solid section. Fig. 15. Loading of hollow circular section for cases A and B.
 O. Soydas, A. Saritas / International Journal of Mechanical Sciences 74 (2013) 114 11

at yield, T y is 2=3d=23 y , where this is obtained by assuming
a constant shear force that is a multiple of yield strength
y 0:577f y in the section at yield, and by taking integral of it
over the area (Fig. 5c). In the analyses, four different sub-cases (B1,
B2, B3 and B4) are investigated such that applied torque on the
member is one of the following: 0, 0:25T y , 0:50T y and 0:75T y ,
respectively. The responses of the member in terms of base shear
vs. displacements at free end in X and Z directions for each sub-
cases are plotted for solid circular section in Figs. 13 and 14,
respectively.
It can be deduced from Fig. 11 to Fig. 14 that the effect of axial
load on nonlinear behavior is more pronounced compared to the
effect of torsion for the solid member. Moreover, 3d mixed
element is capable of reecting the dependency of nonlinear
behavior on direction of loading since nonlinear curves for X and
Z directions are not the same.
The same member is this time considered to be made of a
hollow circular section with inner radius a and outer radius b
(Fig. 15). Same material properties, loading cases and discretiza-
tion are considered in the analyses of the hollow sections with a=b

300 300
X 0*N y a/b=0 X 0*Ty a/b=0
Shear Force in X

Shear Force in X
200 X 0*N y a/b=0.3 200 X 0*Ty a/b=0.3
X 0*N y a/b=0.7 X 0*Ty a/b=0.7
100 100
X 0*N y a/b=0.9 X 0*Ty a/b=0.9

0 X 0*N y a/b=0.95 0 X 0*Ty a/b=0.95

X 0*N y a/b=0.99 X 0*Ty a/b=0.99
-100 -100

-200 -200
0 2 4 6 0 2 4 6
Displacement in X Displacement in X

200 200
X 0.25*N y a/b=0 X 0.25*T y a/b=0
Shear Force in X

Shear Force in X

X 0.25*N y a/b=0.3 X 0.25*T y a/b=0.3

100 100
X 0.25*N y a/b=0.7 X 0.25*T y a/b=0.7
X 0.25*N y a/b=0.9 X 0.25*T y a/b=0.9
0 0
X 0.25*N y a/b=0.95 X 0.25*T y a/b=0.95

-100 X 0.25*N y a/b=0.99 -100 X 0.25*T y a/b=0.99

-200 -200
0 2 4 6 0 2 4 6
Displacement in X Displacement in X

200 200
X 0.50*N y a/b=0 X 0.50*Ty a/b=0
Shear Force in X

Shear Force in X

X 0.50*N y a/b=0.3 X 0.50*Ty a/b=0.3

100 100
X 0.50*N y a/b=0.7 X 0.50*Ty a/b=0.7
X 0.50*N y a/b=0.9 X 0.50*Ty a/b=0.9
0 0
X 0.50*N y a/b=0.95 X 0.50*Ty a/b=0.95
X 0.50*N y a/b=0.99 -100 X 0.50*Ty a/b=0.99
-100

-200 -200
0 2 4 6 0 2 4 6
Displacement in X Displacement in X

100 150
X 0.75*N y a/b=0 X 0.75*T y a/b=0
Shear Force in X

Shear Force in X

100
X 0.75*N y a/b=0.3 X 0.75*T y a/b=0.3
50
X 0.75*N y a/b=0.7 50 X 0.75*T y a/b=0.7
X 0.75*N y a/b=0.9 X 0.75*T y a/b=0.9
0 0
X 0.75*N y a/b=0.95 X 0.75*T y a/b=0.95
-50
X 0.75*N y a/b=0.99 X 0.75*T y a/b=0.99
-50
-100

-100 -150
0 2 4 6 0 2 4 6
Displacement in X Displacement in X
Fig. 16. Base shear vs. tip displacement in global X direction for solid and hollow circular sections for different a/b ratio under cyclic loading. (a) Base shear force vs. tip
displacement in X for 0  Ny. (b) Base shear force vs. tip displacement in X for 0  Ty. (c) Base shear force vs. tip displacement in X for 0.25  Ny. (d). Base shear force vs. tip
displacement in X for 0.25  Ty. (e) Base shear force vs. tip displacement in X for 0.50  Ny. (f) Base shear force vs. tip displacement in X for 0.50  Ty. (g) Base shear force vs.
tip displacement in X for 0.75  Ny. (h) Base shear force vs. tip displacement in X for 0.75  Ty.
12 O. Soydas, A. Saritas / International Journal of Mechanical Sciences 74 (2013) 114

ratio varied as one of the following: 0.3, 0.7, 0.9, 0.95 and 0.99. member, M y Sf y and plastic moment, M p Z p f y to the length of
Eq. (42) is used for calculation of the shear correction factor in the member that are obtained for both solid and hollow circular
4
element response. Results of the analyses are summarized in sections. Elastic section modulus is equal to S b a4 =4b
3
Fig. 16 for the same level of N y and T y as discussed before, where and plastic section modulus is equal to Z p 4b a =3 as sum-
3

the response of the cyclically loaded member is only presented in marized in Table 2. These theoretical values and also the section
terms of global X direction. The accuracy of the nonlinear response of the proposed beam element do not consider nonlinear
responses obtained in these gures can be veried through geometric effects such as local buckling in the case of thin-walled
comparison with theoretical values under zero axial load on the geometry.
member. The base shear values can be calculated by dividing In order to present the results of the thinner walled sections in
theoretical values of yield moment under zero axial load on a more consistent scale, Fig. 17 is prepared, where the response of
the cyclically loaded member is again presented in terms of global
X direction only. For thin walled sections, the effect of axial load
Table 2
and torsion on nonlinear behavior is observed to be more
Theoretical base shear values calculated from moment at yield and plastic limit. dominant than the effect of same parameters on solid circular
section. The effect of direction of loading on nonlinear behavior is
a/b S My My/L Zp Mp Mp/L also visible in the gure. For solid circular section the effect of axial
load is important which is also important for hollow sections.
0 572.56 20,611.99 114.51 972.00 34,992.00 194.40
0.3 567.92 20,445.03 113.58 945.76 34,047.22 189.15 While the effect of torsion is relatively less important in solid
0.5 536.77 19,323.74 107.35 850.50 30,618.00 170.10 circular sections, it becomes necessary to consider coupling of
0.7 435.08 15,663.05 87.02 638.60 22,989.74 127.72 torsion on nonlinear response of hollow sections. The proposed
0.9 196.90 7088.46 39.38 263.41 9482.83 52.68 beam element in this paper in this regards is able to capture this
0.95 106.21 3823.40 21.24 138.63 4990.73 27.73
0.99 22.56 812.19 4.51 28.87 1039.30 5.77
interaction, thus can be reliably used for the analysis of members
under various loading and boundary conditions.

60 60
X 0*N y a/b=0.9 X 0*Ty a/b=0.9
40 40
Shear Force in X

Shear Force in X

X 0.25*N y a/b=0.9 X 0.25*Ty a/b=0.9

20 X 0.50*N y a/b=0.9 20 X 0.50*Ty a/b=0.9
X 0.75*N y a/b=0.9 X 0.75*Ty a/b=0.9
0 0

-20 -20

-40 -40

-60 -60
0 2 4 6 0 2 4 6
Displacement in X Displacement in X

30 30
X 0*N y a/b=0.95 X 0*Ty a/b=0.95
20 20
Shear Force in X

Shear Force in X

X 0.25*N y a/b=0.95 X 0.25*Ty a/b=0.95

10 X 0.50*N y a/b=0.95 X 0.50*Ty a/b=0.95
10
X 0.75*N y a/b=0.95 X 0.75*Ty a/b=0.95
0 0
-10
-10

-20 -20

-30 -30
0 2 4 6 0 2 4 6
Displacement in X Displacement in X

6 6
X 0*N y a/b=0.99 X 0*T y a/b=0.99
4 4
Shear Force in X

Shear Force in X

X 0.25*N y a/b=0.99 X 0.25*Ty a/b=0.99

2 X 0.50*N y a/b=0.99 2 X 0.50*Ty a/b=0.99
X 0.75*N y a/b=0.99 X 0.75*Ty a/b=0.99
0 0

-2 -2

-4 -4

0 2 4 0 2 4
Displacement in X Displacement in X
Fig. 17. Base shear vs. tip displacement in global X direction under cyclic loading for hollow circular sections with a/b ratio equals to 0.9, 0.95 and 0.99. (a) Base shear force vs.
tip displacement in X for different level of Ny and a/b 0.9. (b) Base shear force vs. tip displacement in X for different level of Ty and a/b 0.9. (c) Base shear force vs. tip
displacement in X for different level of Ny and a/b 0.95. (d) Base shear force vs. tip displacement in X for different level of Ty and a/b 0.95. (e) Base shear force vs. tip
displacement in X for different level of Ny and a/b 0.99. (f) Base shear force vs. tip displacement in X for different level of Ty and a/b 0.99.
 O. Soydas, A. Saritas / International Journal of Mechanical Sciences 74 (2013) 114 13

3.4. Example 4: nonlinear analysis of uniform xed-xed pipe
In this example, nonlinear responses of the proposed 3d
Timoshenko mixed formulation beam element (proposed MF) and
EulerBernoulli version of the current mixed formulation beam
element (EBMF) are compared with the examples considered by
Nowzartash and Mohareb [27]. EBMF element implemented as part
of this comparison considers the presence of inelastic material
behavior for normal stress directed along element length, and
furthermore shear stress is only caused due to torsion and is
assumed to remain in the elastic range. In the study by Nowzartash
and Mohareb, a 3d lumped plasticity beam element denoted as
P3D2HE was formulated for the analysis of elevated and submerged
steel pipes. Analysis results in the aforementioned study that
compare P3D2HE with the elements B33, PIPE31, FRAME3D and
ELBOW31 that exist in ABAQUS [34] are also beneted from for the
verication of the proposed MF element. Properties of elements that
are employed in comparisons are summarized in Table 3, where EBT
and TBT abbreviations mean EulerBernoulli and Timoshenko beam
theories, respectively. For through discussion, please refer to the
study by Nowzartash and Mohareb [27].
It is worth to mention that the lumped plasticity element by
Nowzartash and Mohareb assumes elastic perfectly plastic response
and considers only the presence of plastic hinges at element ends.
The formulated element necessitates a priori calculation/estimation
of sectional geometric parameters as well as the yield and plastic
capacities of section forces as an input. On the other hand, the
proposed mixed formulation element does not have any of these
limitations in its formulation due to the use of ber discretization
model for section state determination and distributed inelasticity
formulation for element state determination.
For analysis, Nowzartash and Mohareb considered a DN90 STD
pipe section with outer diameter 101.6 mm, thickness 5.74 mm,
elastic modulus 200 GPa, yield strength 350 MPa and Poisson's
ratio 0.3; and the following loading cases for this pipe are
presented for verication purposes in this paper.
3.4.1. Combined bending and torsion of a long xed-xed pipe
In this case, a vertical load P(kN) and torque T P(kN m) are
applied to a 6 m xed-xed beam. The load is applied to the second
node which is 4 m away from node 1 and nonlinear response is
investigated by monitoring node 2 as depicted in Fig. 18.

Table 3
Properties of elements employed in comparison of nonlinear responses.

Element Name Element type Beam formulation No. of nodes/element Number of dofs

B33 EBT DB 2 end nodes 6 per node

PIPE31 TBT (shear elastic) DB 2 end nodes 6 per node
FRAME3D EBT (lumped plasticity) DB 2 end nodes 6 per end nodes
ELBOW31 TBT DB 1 intermediate node 3 for intermediate
2 end nodes 6 per node
P3D2HE TBT (lumped plasticity) DB 2 end nodes 6 per node
EB-MF EBT MF 2 end nodes 6 per node
Proposed MF TBT MF 2 end nodes 6 per node

30

25

20
Load P (kN)

15
EB-MF ne =2
B33 or PIPE31 n e=48
10
ELBOW31 ne =120
Proposed MF ne =2
5 FRAME3D ne =2
P3D2HE ne =2
0
0 50 100 150 200 250
Transverse Displacement at node 2 (mm)

Fig. 18. Comparison of load vs. transverse displacement at node 2 for long beam.

250

200
Load P (kN)

150
FRAME3D n e=2
EB-MF ne=2
100 PIPE31 n e=60
B33 ne=60
ELBOW31 n e =100
50
Proposed MF n e =2
P3D2HE ne =2
0
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
Transverse Displacement at node 2 (mm)

Fig. 19. Comparison of load vs. transverse displacement at node 2 for short beam.
14 O. Soydas, A. Saritas / International Journal of Mechanical Sciences 74 (2013) 114
It is evident from the gure that proposed MF is able to
properly reect the inuence of the loads applied on the member
with two elements per span. Although EBMF overestimates the
response, it models the elastic portion in a successful manner
since member's length is sufciently long that shear effects do not
prevail.
3.4.2. Bending of a short xed-xed pipe
This time, the total length of the member is decreased to 1 m
and only vertical load is applied to the second node that is 0.8 m
from node 1 as shown in Fig. 19. In this case proposed MF is the
most successful element that simulates the nonlinear behavior by
approaching the theoretical value 189.5 kN m obtained with upper
bound theorem as given by Nowzartash and Mohareb [27].
FRAME3D, EBMF and PIPE31 are incapable of modeling even
elastic portion since the member is short and those elements
neglect shear deformation effects. ELBOW31 and P3D2HE ele-
ments coincide for the elastic portion whereas the former over-
estimates and the latter underestimates the nonlinear response.
4. Conclusions
A 3d mixed formulation beam nite element that is based on
three-eld Hu-Washizu functional is derived in this study. The
formulation of the element eliminates the need for displacement
values along the element except at the nodes and it is free from
shear-locking. The mixed element is tested under nonlinear
loading conditions for uniform and tapered structural members
and it is shown that the element is capable of modeling the effect
of nonlinear interaction of stresses in 3d with a considerable good
accuracy compared to the closed form solutions and available data
in literature. It is pointed out that the effect of axial load is both
important for solid and hollow circular sections whereas the effect
of torsion is more signicant for hollow members in nonlinear
analysis.
The mixed element is also superior to 3d Timoshenko displace-
ment based element in nonlinear analysis and emulates the
displacement based elements available in the literature. It is
shown that using lesser number of mixed elements is quite
satisfactory for modeling the nonlinear behavior compared to
the displacement based elements. It is also pointed out in this
study that increasing the number of integration points for section
beyond some limiting value does not improve the results but
creates unnecessary increase in solution durations for both mixed
and displacement based elements.
References
[1] Hughes TJR, Taylor RL, Kanoknukulchai W. A simple and efcient nite-
element for plate bending. Int J Numer Methods Eng. 1977;11:152943.
[2] Yokoyama T. A reduced integration Timoshenko beam element. J Sound Vib
1994;169:4118.
[3] Reddy JN. An introduction to the nite element method. New York: McGraw-
Hill; 1993.
[4] Friedman Z, Kosmatka JB. An Improved two-node timoshenko beam nite
element. Comput Struct 1993;47:47381.
[5] Przemieniecki JS. Theory of matrix structural analysis. New York: McGraw-Hill,
Inc.; 1968.
[6] Mazars J, Kotronis P, Ragueneau F, Casaux G. Using multiber beams to
account for shear and torsion applications to concrete structural elements.
Comput. Methods Appl. Mech. Eng 2006;195:726481.
[7] Triantafyllou SP, Koumousis VK. An inelastic Timoshenko beam element with
axialshearexural interaction. Comput Mech 2011;48:71327.
[8] Taylor RL, Filippou FC, Saritas A, Auricchio F. A mixed nite element method
for beam and frame problems. Compu tMech 2003:192203.
[9] Saritas A, Soydas O. Variational base and solution strategies for nonlinear
force-based beam nite elements. Int J Non-Linear Mech 2012;47:5464.
[10] Spacone E, Filippou FC, Taucer FF. Fibre beam-column model for non-linear
analysis of R/C frames: part I. Formulation, Earthquake Eng Struct Dyn 1996.
[11] Souza RM. Force-based nite element for large displacement inelastic analysis
of frames. PhD Thesis Dissertation. University of California, Berkeley; 2000.
[12] Criseld MA. A consistent co-rotational formulation for non-linear, three
dimensional, beam elements. Comput Methods Appl Mech Eng 1990;81:
13150.
[13] Nukala PKVV, White DW. A mixed nite element for three-dimensional
nonlinear analysis of steel frames. Comput Methods Appl Mech Eng
2004:250745.
[14] Saritas A, Filippou FC. Inelastic axial-exure-shear coupling in a mixed
formulation beam nite element. Int J Non-Linear Mech 2009:91322.
[15] Saritas A, Filippou FC. Frame element for metallic shear-yielding members
under cyclic loading. J Struct Eng 2009.
[16] Saritas A, Filippou FC. Numerical integration of a class of 3d plastic-damage
concrete models and condensation of 3d stress-strain relations for use in
beam nite elements. Eng Struct 2009:232736.
[17] Papachristidis A, Fragiadakis M, Papadrakakis M. A 3D bre beam-column
element with shear modelling. Comput Mech 2010;45:55372.
[18] Argyris J, Tenek L, Mattsson A. BEC: A 2-node fast converging shear-
deformable isotropic and composite beam element based on 6 rigid-body
and 6 straining modes. Comput Methods Appl Mech Eng 1998:281336.
[19] Wackerfuss J, Gruttmann FA, Nonlinear Hu-Washizu A. Variational formulation
and related nite-element implementation for spatial beams with arbitrary
moderate thick cross sections. Comput Meth Appl Mech Eng 2011;200:
167190.
[20] Washizu K. Variational methods in elasticity and plasticity. London: Pergamon
Press; 1968.
[21] Cowper GR. The shear coefcient timoshenko's beam theory. J Appl Mech
1966:33540.
[22] Reddy JN. On locking-free shear deformable beam nite elements. Comput
Methods Appl Mech Eng 1997;149:11332.
[23] Kutlu A, Omurtag MH. Large deection bending analysis of elliptic plates on
orthotropic elastic foundation with mixed nite element method. Int J Mech
Sci 2012:6474.
[24] Hutchinson JR. Shear coefcients for timoshenko beam theory. J Appl Mech
2001;68.
[25] Zhang P, Fu Y, Higher-order Beam A. Model for Tubes. Eur J Mech A Solids
2012;38:129.
[26] Luo Y. An efcient 3d Timoshenko beam element with consistent shape
functions. Adv Theory Appl Mech 2008;1:95106.
[27] Nowzartash F, Mohareb M. An elasto-plastic nite element for steel pipelines.
Int J Pressure Vessels Piping 2004;81:91930.
[28] Friedman Z, Kosmatka JB. Exact stiffness matrix of a nonuniform beam-II,
Bending Timoshenko Beam. Comput Struct 1993;49:54555.
[29] Murn J, Kuti V. 3D-beam element with continous varitaion of the cross-
sectional area. Comput Struct 2002:32938.
[30] Shooshtari A, Khajavi R. An efcient procedure to nd shape functions and
stiffness matrices of nonprismatic Euler-Bernoulli and Timoshenko beam
elements. Eur J Mech A Solids 2010:82636.
[31] Gaydon FA. On the combined torsion and tension of a partly plastic circular
cylinder. Quart J Mech Appl Math 1951;V.
[32] Ali ARM, Hashmi MSJ. Theoretical and experimental results of the elastic
plastic response of a circular rod subjected to non-proportional combined
torque and tension loadings. Proc Inst Mech Eng, Part C J Mech Eng Sci
1999;213:25161.
[33] Ugural AC, Fenster SK. Advanced strength and applied elasticity. New Jersey:
Prentice Hall; 2003.
[34] Hibbit Karlsson, Sorensen. ABAQUS theory manual. Version 6.2, Inc., Paw-
tucket, RI, USA; 2001.