See

discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/229341300

Geometrically nonlinear analysis of planar

circular arches based on rigid element concept
— A structural approach

Article in Engineering Structures · April 2008

DOI: 10.1016/j.engstruct.2007.06.003

CITATIONS READS

11 73

2 authors:

Jong-Dar Yau Y.B. Yang

Tamkang University Chongqing University
34 PUBLICATIONS 591 CITATIONS 248 PUBLICATIONS 4,210 CITATIONS

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

All in-text references underlined in blue are linked to publications on ResearchGate, Available from: Y.B. Yang
letting you access and read them immediately. Retrieved on: 22 November 2016
This article was published in an Elsevier journal. The attached copy
is furnished to the author for non-commercial research and
education use, including for instruction at the author’s institution,
sharing with colleagues and providing to institution administration.
Other uses, including reproduction and distribution, or selling or
licensing copies, or posting to personal, institutional or third party
websites are prohibited.
In most cases authors are permitted to post their version of the
article (e.g. in Word or Tex form) to their personal website or
institutional repository. Authors requiring further information
regarding Elsevier’s archiving and manuscript policies are
encouraged to visit:

http://www.elsevier.com/copyright
 Author's personal copy

Engineering Structures 30 (2008) 955–964

www.elsevier.com/locate/engstruct

Geometrically nonlinear analysis of planar circular arches based on rigid

element concept — A structural approach
J.D. Yau a , Y.B. Yang b,∗
a Department of Architecture and Building Technology, Tamkang University, Taipei, 10620, Taiwan
b Department of Civil Engineering, National Taiwan University, Taipei, 10617, Taiwan

Received 27 February 2007; received in revised form 22 June 2007; accepted 26 June 2007
Available online 30 July 2007

Abstract

To overcome the difficulty involved in selecting proper shape functions for simulating the bending-tension coupling of a curved beam, a non-
conventional “structural” approach is presented in this paper. For curved-beam elements with small subtended angles, the elastic stiffness matrix
is derived as the composition of two chordwise straight beam elements used to represent the curved beam. In contrast, the geometrical stiffness
matrix of the curved beam is derived by the rigid element concept, through transformation of the geometrical stiffness matrix of the rigid straight
beam spanning the two ends of the curved bean from the rectangular to the curvilinear coordinates. Compared with the conventional finite element
procedures relying strongly on numerical integrations, the present approach has the advantage of being simple in formulation, but also explicit in
expressions. The numerical studies indicate that the derived curved beam element has good convergence characteristics upon mesh refinement for
the linear problems studied, and is capable of solving the stability and nonlinear problems involving large-displacement postbuckling response.
c 2007 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Keywords: Arch; Buckling; Curved beam; Geometric nonlinearity; Rigid body rule

1. Introduction Concerning the finite element formulation of a curved

Masonry arches were often used by ancient Romans as the
supporting foundation of their bridges or buildings when the
Roman civilization pervaded the European continent. Along
with the expansion of their empire, semicircular arches became
a typical symbol of the Roman architecture [1]. The basic
feature of an arch is that it can sustain the self-weight and
external loads in a compressive manner, i.e. without introducing
any tensile force on the structure. Such a structural form is
particularly suitable for building materials that are strong in
resisting compressive, rather than tensile forces, including stone
and concrete. With mechanical properties similar to the arch
structures, a vertical curved beam can transfer the gravity
loads through the bending-tension coupling effect, by which the
material can be used in a more efficient manner than a straight
beam. However, the coupling effect has made the deformation
behaviors of curved beam structures much more complicated
than structures composed of straight beams.
∗ Corresponding author. Tel.: +886 2 3366 4245; fax: +886 2 2362 2975.
E-mail address: ybyang@ntu.edu.tw (Y.B. Yang).
beam element, the use of low-order independent polynomial
interpolations for the normal (e.g. cubic polynomials) and
tangential (e.g. linear polynomials) displacements may bring
about significant errors in the computational results. Such a
phenomenon, commonly known as membrane locking, has been
reviewed by Prathap [2]. To overcome such a problem, efforts
have been undertaken by researchers using approaches such as
the strain element technique, reduced integration method, and
isoparametric elements [3–5]. In the literature, a number of
curved-beam elements were developed for the free vibration,
buckling and postbuckling analyses of curved beams [6–20],
based on various theories. It was pointed out by Pi et al. [19,
20] that some general purpose finite element codes, such as
ABAQUS and ANSYS, were unable to accurately predict the
elasto-plastic behaviour of members curved in space.
Though some progress has been made in the past in the study
of curved beam problems, the coupling behaviour (bending-
tension and bending-torsion) of curved beams remains a
mathematical hindrance in the derivation of a consistent
displacement (strain) field for the curved beam element aimed

c 2007 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

0141-0296/$ - see front matter
doi:10.1016/j.engstruct.2007.06.003
 Author's personal copy

956 J.D. Yau, Y.B. Yang / Engineering Structures 30 (2008) 955–964

at avoiding the membrane locking problem. In the out-of-plane

buckling analysis of curved beams, Yang and co-workers [21,
22] have demonstrated that a curved beam can be simulated
by a number of straight-beam elements through consideration
of the equilibrium for structural joints connecting noncollinear
members in the deformed configuration.
As can be seen from the above review, there is an apparent
lack of a simple and straightforward approach for formulating
a curved beam element that is free of membrane locking in
the elastic stiffness for linear analysis, and can duly take into Fig. 1. Finite element modelling of a circular curved beam.
account the effect of curvature on the geometrical stiffness
for buckling analysis. On the other hand, planar curved
beams constitute a special class of structures in engineering
applications, for which both the in-plane deformation and out-
of-plane buckling behaviours have always been the concerns of
structural designers.
For the reasons stated above, a nonconventional structural
approach will be proposed herein for deriving the planar curved
beam element. For curved beams with small subtended angles,
the elastic stiffness matrix of the curved beam will be derived
as the composition of two chordwise straight-beam elements
used to represent the curved beam. Based on the concept of
rigid displacements [23,24], the geometric stiffness matrix of
the curved beam will be derived by transforming the geometric Fig. 2. Modelling of a curved-beam element by two chordwise straight-beam
elements.
stiffness matrix of the straight beam with identical nodal
degrees from the rectangular coordinates to the curvilinear
coordinates. To examine the applicability and accuracy of the the curved beam into a number of curved-beam elements,
curved-beam element presented herein, four examples on linear as shown in Fig. 1. To circumvent the problem associated
static, buckling and geometrically nonlinear analyses of curved- with the selection of proper shape functions for treating the
beam structures will be studied. coupling effect of bending-extension deformations, each planar
curved-beam element with a small subtended angle (=2ϕ)
2. Basic assumptions for planar curved beams will be replaced by two chordwise straight-beam elements, as
schematically depicted in Fig. 1. The curved beam element of
In this section, a simple, nonconventional structural concern is shown in Fig. 2 with a radius R and subtended angle
approach will be presented for formulation of the planar 2ϕ. The z-axis in Fig. 2 represents one of the principal axes of
curved-beam element, which can be regarded primarily as the cross-section, and the x-axis is tangent to the curvilinear
extensions of the theories for the straight-beam element axis of the beam.
concerning derivation of the elastic stiffness matrix and
geometrical stiffness matrix. The following are the assumptions Concerning derivation of the elastic stiffness matrix for
adopted for the planar curved beam: describing the linear behaviour, the curved-beam element acb
in Fig. 2 will be approximated by the two chordwise straight
(1) The material is elastic and homogeneous; beam elements ac and cb, also named as beam elements i
(2) The cross-section of the curved beam is uniform and doubly and j, respectively, which share a common auxiliary node c
symmetrical; at the midpoint of the curved- beam element. In addition, θi
(3) Every cross-section remains rigid, i.e. undistorted, during and θ j represent the included angles of segments ac and cb,
deformation; respectively, with respect to the chord ab of the curved element
(4) The length and radius of the curved beam are large in in the X –Z coordinate system shown in Fig. 2.
comparison with the cross-sectional dimensions of the
beam; With reference to Fig. 2, the elastic stiffness matrix of
(5) The shearing deformation on the curved beam is negligible; the straight-beam element along the chord ac or cb can
and be expressed in a partitioned form in the respective local
(6) Only concentrated loadings are allowed to act at the two coordinates as
ends of the curved-beam element. " #
  [k11,n ] [k12,n ]
ke,n n=i, j = (1)
3. Elastic stiffness matrix of planar curved-beam element [k21,n ] [k22,n ]

For analysis of a circular curved beam subjected to external in which the subscript n (=i, j) indicates the straight beam
loadings by the finite element method, it is reasonable to divide element of concern. The submatrices in Eq. (1) are [22,25]
 Author's personal copy

J.D. Yau, Y.B. Yang / Engineering Structures 30 (2008) 955–964 957

EA
 
0 0
 Ln 

  0 12E I 6E I 
− 2 ,
 
k11,n = 
 L 3n Ln  (2a)
 
 6E I 4E I 
0 − 2
Ln Ln
EA
 
− 0 0 Fig. 3. Nodal forces of a curved beam element.
 Ln 

T  0 12E I 6E I 
  
k12,n = k21,n =  − 3 − 2 ,

(2b) two chordwise straight elements have identical length. In this
 Ln Ln  study, a clockwise rotation θ y is taken as positive. Based on
 
 6E I 2E I  the hypothesis of shallowness, the subtended angle 2ϕ of the
0
L 2n Ln curved beam element is assumed to be small. As a consequence,

EA
 the tangential angle ϕ at the two ends a and b with respect
0 0 to the chords ac and cb can be approximated by the included
 Ln 

  0 12E I 6E I  angles θi and −θ j , that is, sin θi = sin(ϕ − θi ), or, θi =
L 2n  ,

−θ j = ϕ/2. By introducing this relation into Eqs. (4) and (5)

k22,n = 
 L 3n
 (2c)

 6E I 4E I 
 and assembling the two element stiffness matrices by the direct
0 stiffness method [25], one can obtain the following approximate
L 2n Ln
elastic stiffness matrix for the curved-beam element acb:
where E = elastic modulus, A = cross sectional area, 
i i

I = moment of inertia, and L n |n=i, j = length of the element n=
Xj [kaa ] [kac ] [0]
j j 
] + [kcc ] [kcb ] .
 i T i
i or j, as shown in Fig. 2. To assemble the stiffness matrices of [ks ]9x9 = [kn ] = [kac ] [kcc (6)
j j
the two straight-beam elements connected at the auxiliary node n=i [0] [kcb ]T [kbb ]
c, the stiffness matrices in each local coordinate system should
be transformed into the common X –Z coordinate system [25], Then, the matrix equation of force equilibrium for the curved-
that is, beam element with nodes a, b, and c, as shown in Fig. 3, can be
given as follows:
 i i

[kaa ] [kac ]
[ki ] = [T (θi )] ke,i [T (θi )] =
T
,
     i i
 
i T i {da } [kaa ] [kac ] [0] {da }
[kac ] [kcc ]  i T i j j
[ks ] {dc } = [kac ] [kcc ] + [kcc ] [kcb ] {dc }

"
j j
# (3a,b)
 [kcc ] [kcb ] j j
{db } [kcb ]T {db }
T     
k j = T (θ j ) ke, j T (θ j ) , [0] [kbb ]
   
j j
[kcb ]T [kbb ]  
{ pa }
where the submatrices in Eqs. (3a,b) are given by = {0} , (7)
{ pb }
 
i
[kaa ] = [Ti ]T [k11,i ][Ti ],
[kac ] = [Ti ]T [k12,i ][Ti ],
i
(4a–c) where {dn }n=a,b,c = nodal displacement vectors, and { pa } and
i
[kcc ] = [Ti ]T [k22,i ][Ti ], { pb } are the nodal force vectors at nodes a and b, respectively,
namely,
j
[kcc ] = [T j ]T [k11, j ][T j ],    
j
[kcb ] = [T j ]T [k12, j ][T j ], (4d–f)  un   Fxn 
j {dn } = vn , { pn } = Fzn . (8a, b)
[kbb ] = [T j ]T [k22, j ][T j ],
θ yn n=a,b,c M yn n=a,b
   
and the transformation matrices [Ti ] and [T j ] can be expressed
as Considering only the force equilibrium of the auxiliary node c,
  one can write the following equation of equilibrium based on
[Tn ] [0] Eq. (7):
[T (θn )]n=i, j =
[0] [Tn ]  
i T i j j

cos θn sin θn 0
  [kac ] {da } + [kcc ] + [kcc ] {dc } + [kcb ]{db } = {0}, (9)
− sin θn cos θn 0 [0] 
  from which the nodal displacement vector {dc } can be solved
0 0 1
 . (5)
 
= and expressed in terms of the nodal displacement vectors {da }
θ θ
   
cos n sin n 0

− sin θn cos θn 0 
 and {db } as
 [0]
0 0 1 
j
−1 
j

i
{dc } = − [kcc ] + [kcc ] i T
[kac ] {da } + [kcb ]{db } . (10)
For the curved beam element acb shown in Fig. 2, we
shall consider the special case where the connecting node Then, substituting Eq. (10) into Eq. (7) yields the following
c is located at the midpoint of the curved element, i.e. the condensed stiffness equation for the curved-beam element with
 Author's personal copy

958 J.D. Yau, Y.B. Yang / Engineering Structures 30 (2008) 955–964

  −1  −1 
i i i j i T i i j j
[kaa ] − [kac ] [kcc ] + [kcc ] [kac ] −[kac ] [kcc ] + [kcc ] [kcb ]
.
 
k̄e,c = 

 −1
j j T i j j
symm. [kbb ] − [kcb ] [kcc ] + [kcc ] [kcb ]

Box I.

the two nodes a and b:

   
  {da } { pa }
k̄e,c = (11)
{db } { pb }

where [k̄e,c ] is the elastic stiffness matrix of the curved-beam

element in the X –Z coordinate system, given in Box I.
To obtain the elastic stiffness matrix of the curved-beam
element in the curvilinear coordinates x–z as indicated in
Fig. 2, a further transformation of the coordinate system is
necessary, that is,

ke,c = [Tc ]T k̄e,c [Tc ] ,

   
(12)
where the matrix [Tc ] represents the transformation between
the X –Z system and the local x–z curvilinear system for the
two nodes a and b of the element with rotations ϕ and −ϕ,
respectively, that is,
cos ϕ − sin ϕ 0 0 0 0
 sin ϕ cos ϕ 0 0 0 0
 0 0 1 0 0 0
 
[Tc (ϕ)] =  . (13)
 0 0 0 cos ϕ sin ϕ 0
 0 0 0 − sin ϕ cos ϕ 0
0 0 0 0 0 1 Fig. 4. A two-dimensional beam undergoing rigid body rotation: (a) C1
configuration, (b) C2 configuration.
The above procedure for derivation of the elastic stiffness
matrix for the planar curved beam element with two nodes a Correspondingly, the initial force vector {1 F} acting on the
and b based on the straight-beam element stiffness matrices element is (see Fig. 4(a))
is characterized by the fact that it is based purely on the T
{1 F} = Fxa Fza M ya Fxb Fzb M yb .

consideration of structural geometry. Of course, the accuracy (16)

of the curved-beam element can be improved by using more Or, by equilibrium,
chordwise straight elements, rather than only two elements, in
T
the modelling. {1 F} = −Fxb −Fzb

M ya Fxb Fzb M yb (17)

4. Geometric stiffness matrix of planar curved beam
element
In an incremental nonlinear analysis based on the updated
Lagrangian formulation, the incremental element stiffness
equation for a planar beam element from the last calculated
configuration C1 (see Fig. 4(a)) to the current deformed
configuration C2 (see Fig. 4(b)) can be written as [22]
([ke ] + [k g ]){u} + {1 F} = {2 F},
where [ke ] = elastic stiffness matrix, [k g ] = geometrical
stiffness matrix, {1 F} = initial force vector acting at the
C1 configuration, and {2 F} = current force vector at the
deformed configuration C2 . The nodal displacement vector {u}
for the incremental step from C1 to C2 in terms of the x 1 –y 1
coordinates (see Fig. 4) is
{u} = u a va θa u b vb θb .
(15)
where Fxb = axial force, Fzb = shear force, M yb = bending
moment, and Fzb = (M ya + M yb )/L.
Before we proceed with derivation of the geometrical
stiffness matrix for the curved beam element, two important
concepts must be mentioned here. First, as far as the rigid
behaviour is concerned, the behaviour of a two-node curved
beam depends exclusively on the behaviour of the two end
points a and b, but not on the shape or elastic properties of the
element, and thus is identical to the behaviour of the straight
(14) beam consisting of the same end points a and b. Second,
the geometrical stiffness matrix for a two-dimensional straight
beam can be derived in an approximate, but rather accurate
manner, by considering only the rigid body rotations [23,24,26],
due to the fact that that the rigid body displacements constitute
a great portion of the buckling displacement of the beam
elements, as schematically shown in Fig. 5. In this section, the
geometric stiffness matrix of a two-dimensional straight beam
element based on the rigid concept will be first summarized.
 Author's personal copy

J.D. Yau, Y.B. Yang / Engineering Structures 30 (2008) 955–964 959

T
= −Fxb + Fzb θr
{2 F} ∼ −Fxb θr − Fzb Fxb − Fzb θr Fzb + Fxb θr .

M ya M yb

Box II.

Substitution of Eqs. (17) and Box II into Eq. (18) yields the
following expression for the geometrical stiffness matrix [k g ]:
k g {u r } = {2 F} − {1 F}
 

T
= Fzb θr −Fxb θr 0 −Fzb θr Fxb θr 0 .

(22)
For a beam element under a small rigid rotation θr , the
following approximation can be adopted:
va − vb
θr ∼
= . (23)
L
By the preceding relation, one can manipulate the right-hand
side of Eq. (22) to obtain the geometrical stiffness matrix for
the straight-beam element as follows [24,28]:
0 −Fzb 0 0 Fzb 0
 Fxb 0 Fzb −Fxb 0
1 0 0 0 0

.
 
kg =  (24)

L 0 −Fzb 0
 symm. Fxb 0
Fig. 5. Schematic representation of buckling shape for a cantilever. 0
As shown in Fig. 4(b), when a straight-beam element is As can be seen from Eq. (24), the geometrical stiffness
subjected to a small rigid rotation θr , no forces will be generated matrix for the straight beam depends only on the nodal forces
by the elastic stiffness matrix [ke ]. Thus, the incremental and element length, but not on the material and sectional
element stiffness equation in Eq. (14) reduces to properties of the beam, since only rigid displacements have
been considered. Such a matrix is exactly the stiffness matrix
[k g ] {u r } + {1 F} = {2 F} (18) for the rigid beam element [23,24].
For two-point rigid solid elements, whether they are straight
where {u r } denotes the rigid displacement vector, or curved, or whether they are thick or thin, they will exhibit
{u r }T = 0 0 θr 0 −Lθr θr ,

(19) the same rigid body behaviour as long as they have identical
degrees of freedom at the two end points. Thus, the geometrical
and {2 F} denotes the resulting forces acting on the element at stiffness matrix as derived above for the rigid straight beam
C2 after the rigid rotation, as indicated in Fig. 4(b). According element is exactly the same as that for the rigid curved beam
to the rigid body rule [27], the initial nodal forces acting on an element, except that different coordinate systems have been
element should rotate following the rigid rotation, while their used, namely, a rectangular coordinate system is used for the
magnitudes remain unchanged. Consequently, the nodal forces straight beam, and a curvilinear coordinate system for the
{2 F} acting on the element after the rigid rotation should be curved beam. Thus, a transformation of the coordinate systems
equal in magnitude to the initial nodal forces {1 F} acting at C1 , is required to obtain the geometrical stiffness matrix for the
but rotate by the angle θr , as shown in Fig. 4(b), i.e. curved beam from the straight beam.
With reference to Fig. 6, the nodal forces (Fxa , Fza , Fxb ,
{2 F} = [T (θr )]{1 F}, (20) Fzb , M ya , M yb ) of the straight beam can be related to the nodal
forces ( f xa , f za , f xb , f zb , M ya , M yb ) of the curved beam as
where for a small rigid rotation θr , the transformation matrix
[T (θr )] can be approximated as follows: cos ϕ − sin ϕ 0  f xa 
    
 Fxa 
1 Fza =  sin ϕ cos ϕ 0 f za ,
−θr 0 0 0 0 
M ya

0 0 1

M ya

θr 1 0 0 0 0 (25a, b)
cos ϕ sin ϕ 0  f xb 
    
0

0 1 0 0 0
  Fxb 
[T (θr )] ∼
= . (21) Fzb = − sin ϕ cos ϕ 0 f zb .
0 0 0 1 −θr 0
0 θr M yb 0 0 1 M yb
0    
0 1 0
0 0 0 0 0 1 From the first two equations of Eq. (25b), the following
equations of equilibrium can be written:
As a result, the nodal forces {2 F} reduce to the equation in
Box II. Fxb = f xb cos ϕ + f zb sin ϕ. (26a)
 Author's personal copy

960 J.D. Yau, Y.B. Yang / Engineering Structures 30 (2008) 955–964

0 f xb sin ϕ − f zb cos ϕ 0 0 − f xb sin ϕ + f zb cos ϕ 0

 f xb cos ϕ + f zb sin ϕ 0 − f xb sin ϕ + f zb cos ϕ −( f xb cos ϕ + f zb sin ϕ) 0
1 0 0 0 0

.
 
k̄ g = 

L 0 f xb sin ϕ − f zb cos ϕ 0
 symm. f xb cos ϕ + f zb sin ϕ 0
0

Box III.

0 − f zb 0 0 f zb 0
 f xb 0 f zb − f xb 0
1 
0 0 0 0

= k g,c0 + 1k g,c0 =
k g,c = [Tc ]T k̄ g [Tc ] ∼
        
0 − f zb 0
 
2Rϕ 
 symm. f xb 0
0
3ϕ f − 2 f
xb zb f xb + 2 f zb ϕ 0 f xb ϕ − f xb 0
 2( f zb − f xb ϕ) 0 f xb + 2 f zb ϕ 0 0
1  0 0 0 0

+

− f xb + 2 f zb − f xb 0
 
2R 
 symm. 2( f xb ϕ − f zb ) 0
0

Box IV.

1 −ϕ 0 0 0 0
ϕ 1 0 0 0 0
0 0 1 0 0 0
 
[Tc (ϕ)] '  . (28c)
0 0 0 1 ϕ 0
0 0 0 −ϕ 1 0
0 0 0 0 0 1
By the use of the preceding relations, and by neglecting the
terms involving ϕ 2 and higher orders, the geometrical stiffness
Fig. 6. A two-node planar curved beam element. matrix for the curved beam in Eq. (27) can be rederived and
expressed in an explicit form as given in Box IV.
M ya + M yb Here, one can observe that the geometrical stiffness matrix
Fzb = = − f xb sin ϕ + f zb cos ϕ, (26b) for a rigid curved beam with a small subtended angle consists of
L
two parts. The first part [k g,c0 ] represents the uncoupled effect
Substituting Eqs. (26) into Eq. (24) yields the geometrical of the nodal forces f xb and f zb , and the second part [1k g,c0 ]
stiffness matrix of the straight beam in terms of the nodal forces the coupling effect between the nodal forces f xb and f zb due
of the curved beam as given in Box III. to the curvature effect of the curved beam. Moreover, for the
The preceding geometrical stiffness matrix can be trans- limit case when (R → ∞, ϕ → 0) but 2Rϕ → L, then
formed to the one for the curved beam in the curvilinear co- = Fxb , f zb ∼
f xb ∼ = Fzb and the geometrical stiffness matrix for
ordinate system as follows: the curved beam given in Box IV reduces to that in Eq. (24) for
the straight beam.
k g,c = [Tc ]T k̄ g [Tc ] ,
   
(27) From the equation given in Box IV, one observes that as the
angle ϕ approaches zero (ϕ → 0), the accuracy of the matrix
where the transformation matrix [Tc ] has been given in Eq. (13). [k g,c ] will be affected, since ϕ appears in the denominator. This
In the finite element modelling, we shall use only curved forms a limit for reducing the angle ϕ or for subdivision of the
beam elements with small subtended angles. Under such a beam. For the sake of computational accuracy, it is suggested
condition, the equations of equilibrium in Eq. (26) and the that the denominator 2Rϕ be kept in a order close to the length
transformation matrix in Eq. (13) reduce to L of the curved beam, i.e. 2Rϕ ≈ L or ϕ ≈ L/(2R).
At this point, some remarks will be made concerning the
Fxb = f xb + f zb ϕ, properties of the stiffness matrices derived. First of all, the
(28a, b)
Fzb = − f xb ϕ + f zb , assumption of shallowness for the curved beam, i.e. with small
 Author's personal copy
J.D. Yau, Y.B. Yang / Engineering Structures 30 (2008) 955–964
Fig. 7. Motion of body in three-dimensional space.
subtended angles 2ϕ, has been adopted in derivation of the
elastic stiffness matrix [ke,c ] in Section 3. Such an assumption
was not definitely needed in derivation of the geometrical
stiffness matrix [k g,c ] in Section 4. For instance, the full
geometrical stiffness matrix [k g,c ] as given in Eq. (27) (for
all ranges of ϕ) can be directly used. However, it has been
numerically demonstrated that basically no difference can be
made between the results obtained using the full matrix in Eq.
(27) or the simplified matrix given in Box IV (with small angles
ϕ). As such, we prefer to use the simplified version given in
Box IV for its explicitness.
5. Incremental nonlinear analysis
Three typical configurations can be identified for the
incremental nonlinear analysis of structures, as shown in Fig. 7.
The configuration C0 denotes the undeformed configuration,
C1 the last calculated configuration, and C2 the current
configuration of the structure. In an incremental–iterative
analysis based on the updated Lagrangian formulation, the
element stiffness equations can be assembled to form the
incremental equations of equilibrium of the structure with
respect to the last known or initial configuration C1 , given the
applied load increments {2 P} − {1 P}:
[K ] {1U } = {2 P} − {1 P}
where [K ] denotes the structural stiffness matrix assembled
from the element stiffness matrices, {1U } the displacement
increments of the structure generated during the incremental
step from C1 to C2 , and {1 P} and {2 P} respectively denote
the external loads applied on the structure at C1 and C2 . The
solution of the incremental nonlinear equations in Eq. (29) will
be attempted by a combination of the incremental and iterative
procedures.
Three key phases are essential to an incremental–iterative
nonlinear analysis, i.e. the predictor, corrector and equilibrium
checking phases [22,29]. The predictor phase is concerned
with solution of the structural displacement increments {1U }
under given load increments {1P} = {2 P} − {1 P} from the
structural equations in Eq. (29), which may affect the speed
961
of convergence or the number of iterations. In this study,
the curved beam element matrix derived herein, including the
elastic stiffness matrix [ke,c ] in Eq. (12) and the geometric
stiffness matrices [k g,c ] in Eq. (27), will be employed to
construct the structural stiffness matrix [K ].
The corrector phase deals with recovery of the element
forces at C2 from the existing nodal forces and the element
displacement increments {1u} made available from the
structural displacement increments {1U } via the predictor. This
phase determines primarily the accuracy of the solution. In this
study, the element forces {22 f } at C2 with reference to C2 will
be computed as follows:
{22 f } = {11 f } + {1 f } , (30)
where {11 f } denotes the initial nodal forces acting on the curved
beam element at C1 with reference to C1 , and {1 f } the force
increments generated during the incremental step from C1 to
C2 . It should be noted that the nodal forces {11 f } that were
initially acting at C1 with reference to C1 have been treated
as the forces acting at C2 with reference to C2 , according to the
rigid body rule [22,27]. The elastic force increments {1 f } of
the element will be computed as
{1 f } = ke,c + k g,c {1u} ,
   

(31)
where {1u} denotes the element displacement increments. For
each iterative step, the displacement increments {1u} can be
decomposed into two parts as the natural deformations {1u}n
and rigid displacements {1u}r . Since the present curved beam
element is rigid body qualified, no actions will be induced by
the stiffness matrices [ke,c ] + [k g,c ] when undergoing the rigid
displacements {1u}r . Thus, the force increments {1 f } can also
be computed by considering merely the elastic stiffness matrix,
that is, {1 f } = [ke,c ]{1u}n .
After all the element forces are computed and expressed
in the deformed configuration of the structure, one can
compare them with the total applied loads {2 P} to obtain the
unbalanced forces of the structure at C2 , as is typical for the
equilibrium-checking phase. Whenever the unbalanced forces
are greater than preset tolerances, the unbalanced forces should
be regarded as the applied loads and another iteration involving
the three phases should be repeated. Details concerning the
incremental–iterative procedure for the geometrically nonlinear
(29)
analysis of structures are available in Ref. [22].
For the purpose of tracing the load–deflection response
of the curved beam structure, the generalized displacement
control (GDC) method proposed by Yang and Shieh [30]
will be adopted for its general stability in dealing with multi
loops in the postbuckling response. By this method, the load
increment size is determined as a function of the general
stiffness parameter (GSP) [30], which serves as a reliable
indicator for reversing the direction of loading once a limit point
is detected (see Fig. 8). A further description of this method is
available in Ref. [30].
6. Numerical verifications
In order to examine the validity and accuracy of the
curved beam element proposed herein, linear, buckling and
 Author's personal copy
962 J.D. Yau, Y.B. Yang / Engineering Structures 30 (2008) 955–964
Table 1
Convergence study of the curved beam element on deflection analysis
No. of elements 4 10
β = 90◦ 0.075 m (2.7%a )
β = 180◦ 0.451 m (4.2%)
a Percentage error compared with analytical solution.
Fig. 8. General characteristics of nonlinear system.
geometrically nonlinear analyses for different curved beam
structures will be carried out and the results obtained will be
compared with those existing in the literature.
6.1. Deflection of cantilevered curved beams with tip load
In this example, the linear deflection analysis of a
cantilevered curved beam subjected to a vertical load at the
free end will be used to illustrate the applicability of the elastic
stiffness matrix derived for the curved beam element. For the
cantilevered circular ring with a subtended angle β subjected
to a vertical tip load P in Fig. 9, the following properties are
adopted: P = 1 kN, R = 10 m, E A = 106 kN, and
E I = 104 kN m2 . For the two subtended angles π/2 and π
considered, the analytical solutions for the vertical deflection at
the tip are [31]
π P R3 π angles 2ϕ have been listed in Table 2. Obviously, larger


 , for β = ,
1 = 4 EI 3 2 (32)
 3π P R , for β = π.

2 EI
With the curved beam represented by different numbers of
curved beam elements, the numerical results obtained by the
present approach for the vertical tip deflection are compared
with the analytical ones in Table 1. As can be seen, larger errors
exist for curved beams with larger subtended angles. However,
the error decreases as the finite element mesh is refined.
Overall, the present solutions converge in an asymptotic manner
to the analytical solutions upon mesh refinement. Thus, it is
confirmed the elastic stiffness matrix derived in this paper for
the curved beam element is suitable for the linear analysis of
planar circular arches.
6.2. Buckling analysis
To demonstrate the applicability of the geometrical stiffness
matrix derived for the curved beam element given in Box IV
20 Analytical (1)
0.078 m (1.2%) 0.079 m (0.0%) 0.079 m
0.468 m (0.6%) 0.470 m (0.2%) 0.471 m
Fig. 9. Cantilevered circular beam under vertical load.
to general buckling analysis, the in-plane buckling analysis of
a pinned circular arch under radial compression q distributed
along the axis of the beam will be investigated, as shown in
Fig. 10. The distributed radial load q is simulated as statically
equivalent concentrated loads acting on the two nodes of each
element used to represent the arch. The following properties are
adopted for the curved beam: R = 24.257 m, E = 200 GPa,
A = 20.26 × 10−4 m2 , and I = 32.67 × 10−8 m4 . For
a uniformly compressed circular arch, the radial load q will
produce a constant axial force F0 on the beam, which is equal
to q R, and the critical load can be obtained from Ref. [32] as
E I π2
 
F0,cr = qcr R = 2 − 1 . (33)
R ϕ2
For the arch represented by different numbers of curved-beam
elements, the critical loads computed for different subtended
errors occur for arches with larger subtended angles using the
same number of elements, due to violation of the shallowness
hypothesis for larger subtended angles. However, the error
decreases drastically as more elements are used for the mesh.
In fact, the level of errors is an indicator of the shallowness
applicable. It is confirmed that the present curved beam element
can be reliably used in modelling the buckling loads of pinned
circular arches with various subtended angles, if a sufficient
number of elements is used in the representation.
6.3. Postbuckling analysis of shallow arch
The geometrical nonlinear behaviour of the shallow arch
shown in Fig. 11 was analysed by Yang and Kuo [22], Chapter
7, by the GDC method using a 25 straight-beam element
representation. The following data are adopted in this study:
L = 100 in., h = 5 in., E = 2000 psi, I = 1 in.4 , and
A = 1 in.2 . In this finite element modelling, the arch was first
discretized into 14 curved beam elements. Two loading cases
 Author's personal copy
J.D. Yau, Y.B. Yang / Engineering Structures 30 (2008) 955–964
Table 2
Convergence study of the present curved beam element on buckling loads
No. of elements 4 10
2ϕ = 30◦ 18.68 kN (18%a )
2ϕ = 60◦ 4.66 kN (19.8%)
2ϕ = 90◦ 2.06 kN (23.3%)
2ϕ = 150◦ 0.71 kN (34%)
a Percentage error compared with analytical solution.
Fig. 10. Pinned-end circular arch under radial loads.
Fig. 11. Shallow arch.
Fig. 12. Load–deflection curves for shallow arch.
are considered. For the perfect loading case, the vertical load is
applied at the apex of the arch. For the imperfect loading case,
the element nearest to the apex on one side was further divided
into two elements to provide an additional node for application
of loading to produce the effect of imperfection. From Fig. 12,
it is clear that the results obtained by the present approach agree
very well with those by Yang and Kuo [22]. This example
confirms the validation and accuracy of the present curved
beam element for use in geometrical nonlinear analysis.
963
20 Analytical (F0,cr )
16.22 kN (2.1%) 16.17 kN (1.8%) 15.89 kN
4.10 kN (5.4%) 4.02 kN (3.3%) 3.89 kN
1.81 kN (8.5%) 1.77 kN (6.3%) 1.67 kN
0.61 kN (15%) 0.59 kN (11%) 0.53 kN
Fig. 13. Hinged circular arch.
Fig. 14. Load–deflection curves for arch under symmetrical loading.
6.4. Postbuckling analysis of hinged semicircular arch
Fig. 13 shows a hinged semicircular arch subjected to a
central vertical load. The following data are considered: L =
100 in., E = 2000 psi, I = 1 in.4 , and A = 1 in.2 .
Two loading cases are studied. One is called the symmetrical
loading in which the vertical load is applied at the apex of the
arch. The second case is the asymmetric loading in which the
imperfection is introduced by shifting the vertical load to the
node nearest to the centre of the arch, as indicated in Fig. 13.
By using 26 curved-beam elements in the representation, the
load deflection curves computed for the hinged circular arch
subjected to the symmetrical and asymmetrical loadings have
been plotted in Figs. 14 and 15, respectively. As can be seen,
the results obtained by the present curved beam approach agree
generally well with those by Yang and Kuo [22], even though
the circular arch has experienced a very large deformation, such
that the vertical deflection almost reaches the span dimension of
the arch.
 Author's personal copy
964 J.D. Yau, Y.B. Yang / Engineering Structures 30 (2008) 955–964
Fig. 15. Load–deflection curves for arch under asymmetrical loading.
7. Concluding remarks
To circumvent the mathematical hindrance encountered in
formulation of the curved beam element using the conventional
shape function approach, a nonconventional structural approach
is proposed in this paper. The elastic stiffness and geometrical
stiffness matrices of the curved beam element are treated in
different ways. For the curved beam with small subtended
angles, the elastic stiffness matrix is derived as the composition
of two chordwise straight beam elements used to represent
the curved beam. In contrast, the derivation of the geometrical
stiffness matrix is based on the concept of rigid element,
that is, by transformation of the geometrical stiffness matrix
derived for the rigid straight beam sharing the same end nodes
as the curved beam from the rectangular to the curvilinear
coordinates.
The advantage of the present approach is that there is no
need to deal with the bending-tension coupling effect of the
curved beam, thereby avoiding problems such as membrane
locking, and that all the stiffness matrices are presented in
explicit form. The applicability and accuracy of the derived
matrices for the curved beam element have been demonstrated
in the solution of several examples involving the linear,
stability and postbuckling nonlinear behaviours of curved beam
structures. Compared with the use of curved beam element
with no restriction on the subtended angles, e.g. Chapter 7 of
Ref. [22], slightly more elements should be used by the present
approach. On the other hand, the present approach outperforms
the conventional straight beam approach, as the curvature and
instability properties have been considered in the formulation,
though in an approximate manner.
Acknowledgements
The authors would like to thank the financial support through
a grant (NSC 95-2211-E-032-053) from National Science
Council of Taiwan.
References
[1] Heyman J. The science of structural engineering. Imperial College Press;
1999.
[2] Prathap G. The curved beam/deep arch/finite ring element revisited. Int J
Numer Methods Eng 1985;21:389–407.
[3] Choi JK, Lim JK. Simple curved shear beam elements. Comm Numer
Methods Engrg 1993;9:659–69.
[4] Ashwell DG, Sabir AB. Limitations of certain curved finite elements when
applied to arches. Int J Mech Sci 1971;13:133–9.
[5] Ashwell DG, Sabir AB, Roberts TM. Further studies in the application of
curved finite elements to circular arches. Int J Mech Sci 1971;13:507–17.
[6] Sabir AB, Ashwell DG. A comparison of curved beam elements when
used in vibration problems. J Sound Vib 1971;18:555–63.
[7] Veletsos AS, Austin WJ, Lopes Pereira CA, Wung SJ. Free inplane
vibration of circular arches. ASCE J Eng Mech Div 1972;98:311–29.
[8] Sabir AB, Lock AC. Large deflexion geometrically nonlinear finite
element analysis of circular arches. Int J Mech Sci 1973;15:37–47.
[9] Dawe DJ. Curved finite elements for the analysis of shallow and deep
arches. Comput Struct 1974;4:559–80.
[10] Dawe DJ. Numerical studies using circular arch finite elements. Comput
Struct 1974;4:729–40.
[11] Meck HR. An accurate polynomial displacement function for finite ring
elements. Comput Struct 1980;11:265–9.
[12] Prathap G, Babu CR. Field consistency and violent oscillations in the finite
element method. Int J Numer Methods Eng 1987;24:2017–33.
[13] Balasubramanian TS, Prathap G. A field consistent higher order curved
beam element for static and dynamic analysis of stepped arches. Comput
Struct 1989;33:281–8.
[14] Pandian N, Appa Rao TVSR, Chandra S. Studies on performance of
curved beam finite elements for analysis of thin arches. Comput Struct
1989;31:997–1002.
[15] Yang YB, Kuo SR, Cherng YD. Curved beam elements for nonlinear
analysis. ASCE J Eng Mech 1989;115(4):840–55.
[16] Krishnan A, Dharmaraj S, Suresh YJ. Free vibration studies on arches.
J Sound Vib 1995;186:856–63.
[17] Krishnan A, Suresh YJ. A simple cubic linear element for static and free
vibration analyses of curved beams. Comput Struct 1998;68:473–89.
[18] Pi YL, Trahair NS. Non-linear buckling and postbuckling of elastic
arches. Eng Struct 1998;20(7):571–9.
[19] Pi YL, Bradford M, Uy B. A spatially curved-beam element with warping
and Wagner effects. Int J Numer Methods Eng 2005;63:1342–69.
[20] Pi YL, Bradford M, Uy B. A rational elasto-plastic spatially curved thin-
walled beam element. Int J Numer Methods Eng 2007;70:253–90.
[21] Yang YB, Kuo SR, Yau JD. Use of straight-beam approach to study
buckling of curved beams. ASCE J Struct Eng 1991;117(7):1963–78.
[22] Yang YB, Kuo SR. Theory and analysis of nonlinear framed structures.
Singapore: Prentice Hall; 1994.
[23] Yang YB, Lin SP, Chen CS. Rigid body concept for geometric nonlinear
analysis of 3d frames, plates and shells based on the updated Lagrangian
formulation. Comp Methods Appl Mech Eng 2007;196:1178–92.
[24] Yang YB, Lin SP, Leu LJ. Solution strategy and rigid element for
nonlinear analysis of elastically structures based on updated Lagrangian
formulation. Eng Struct 2007;29(6):1189–200.
[25] McGuire W, Gallagher RH. Matrix structural analysis. New York: John
Wiley & Sons, Inc.; 1979.
[26] Yang YB, Chang JT, Yau JD. A simple nonlinear triangular plate element
and strategies of computation for nonlinear analysis. Comp Meth Appl
Mech Eng 1999;178:307–21.
[27] Yang YB, Chiou HT. Rigid body motion test for nonlinear analysis with
beam elements. ASCE J Eng Mech 1987;9:1404–19.
[28] Yang YB, Kuo SR, Wu YS. Incrementally small-deformation theory for
nonlinear analysis of structural frames. Eng Struct 2002;24:783–93.
[29] Yang YB, Yau JD, Leu LJ. Recent development on nonlinear and
postbuckling analysis of framed structures. Appl Mech Rev 2003;56(4):
431–49.
[30] Yang YB, Shieh MS. Solution method for nonlinear problems with
multiple critical points. AIAA J 1990;28(12):2110–6.
[31] Timoshenko SP. Strength of material: Part I. 3rd ed. NJ: D. Van Nostrand
Company, Inc.; 1955.
[32] Timoshenko SP, Gere JM. Theory of elastic stability. 2nd ed. NY:
McGraw-Hill; 1961.