An Introduction to

Timoshenko Beam
Formulation and its FEM
implementation
Chan Yum Ji
COME, Technische Universitt
Mnchen
Content of presentation
Introduction
Formulation of Timoshenko Beam Elements
FEM implementation
Example
Problem with FEM implementation
Reason
p-version FEM implementation
Example
Questions and Answers
References
Bathe, K.-J.: Finite Element Procedures
(Prentice Hall, Englewood Cliffs, 1996)
Bischoff, M.: Lecture Notes on course
Advanced Finite Methods, TUM
0.1 Introduction: Review of Euler-
Bernoulli Beam Theory
Beam is condensed to an 1-D continuum
Assumptions
Mid-surface plane remains in mid-surface after
bending
Cross sections remain straight and perpendicular
to mid-surface
One variable (displacement) at each point
Applicable to thin beams
0.2 How about thick beams?
Shearing force exists inside beam
Assumption Cross sections remain
perpendicular to centroidal plane no
longer valids
Timoshenko theory
0.3 Timoshenko beam theory
Beam is condensed to an 1-D continuum
Assumption
Mid-surface plane remains in mid-surface after
bending
Cross sections remain straight and perpendicular
to mid-surface
Two independent variables (displacement
and rotation) at each point
Distributive moments taken into account
1.1 Governing equations
Kinematic equations
Equilibrium
Constitutive equations (Material Laws)
Displacements
Strains Stresses
Forces
Kinematic equations
Material Laws
Equilibrium
1.2 Kinematic equations
Remember the equations for Euler-
Bernoulli beams
dx
dw
=
2
2
dx
w d
dx
d
= =

1.2 Kinematic equations

and here comes
the equations for
Timoshenko beams!
We still assume cross section
remains straight at the
moment
=
dx
dw
dx
d
=
1.3 Equilibrium
Consider a part of the beam
Q M Q
dx
dM
m
Q
dx
dQ
q
+ = + =
= =
'
'
1.4 Constitutive equations
(Material Laws)
Bending part
Shearing part
takes into account of non-straight cross sections
EI M =
GA Q =
1.5 Summary of all equations
Kinematic relations
Equilibrium
Material Laws
=
dx
dw
dx
d
=


GA Q
EI M
=
=
Q M Q
dx
dM
m
Q
dx
dQ
q
+ = + =
= =
'
'
1.6 Boundary conditions
Displacement / Essential / Dirichlet
Force / Neumann
0
0
) 0 (
) 0 (
M M
Q Q
=
=
l
l
M l M
Q l Q
=
=
) (
) (
0
0

) 0 (

) 0 (
=
= w w
l
l
l
w l w

) (

) (
=
=
2.1 Finite Element Method Weak
formulation
FEM is a numerical method of finding
approximate solutions
Weak formulation
The three equations are not satisfied at each
point, but only in general sense
Virtual work principle:
0
int
= +
ext
W W
2.2 Virtual work principle
External virtual work
Internal virtual work
As ,
( )
l l l l
l
ext
M M w Q w Q dx m w q W + + + + + =

0 0 0 0
0
( )

+ =
l
dx M Q W
0
int

0
int
= +
ext
W W
( )
l l l l
l
M M w Q w Q dx M Q m w q + + + + + =

0 0 0 0
0
0
2.3 Virtual work principle
in Matrices
(

w
u
(
(
(

=
x
x
0
1
*
L
(

=
EI
GA
0
0
C
(

=
M
Q

(
(
(

=
x
x
0
1
L
( ) 0 d
0
0
0
=

l
T
l
T
l
T
x u P u P u p
(

=
m
q
p
2.4 Discretisation
FEM cannot deal with continuous
functions
Unknown coefficients (d) with pre-
assigned shape functions (N)
nodal values as unknowns
two nodes makes up an element
two linear shape functions for an element
Matrix form: u = N d
2.4 Discretisation
Because and
and suppose d N u u =
h
( ) 0
0
0
0
=

l
T
l
T
l
T
dx u P u P u p
( ) | | 0 d
0
0
=

b
l
l
x u P P u p u CL L u
T T
C =
u L =
( ) | | 0 d
0
0
=

d P P d N p d CB B d
T T
l
l
x
(

+ =

l
0
T
P
P
N p d CB B x x
l l
d d
0 0
Stiffness Matrix Load Vector
Unknown
2.5 Implementation
Maple example
Comparison: With Euler-Bernoulli Beam
L
P=t
3
3.1 Problem with FEM
implementation
Displacement much smaller than expected
Extremely slow converging rate
Adding elements does not help
Result depends on one critical parameter
Displacement = 0 when parameter reaches
infinity
Locking
3.1 Locking behaviour exhibits
slow converging rate
Converging behaviour of FE solution
0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1
1.2
0 5 10 15 20 25 30
Number of elements
R
e
l
a
t
i
v
e

d
i
s
p
l
a
c
e
m
e
n
Euler Bernoulli (Analytical) Timoshenko (FE approximation)
3.1 Locking behaviour depends on
slenderness
Change of estimated displacement against slenderness
0.01
0.1
1
10
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20
Slenderness
R
e
l
a
t
i
v
e

d
i
s
p
l
a
c
e
m
e
n
t
Euler Bernoulli (Analytical) Timoshenko (FE approximation)
3.2 Reasons of locking
First Reason
Equilibrium:
When t is small, shear dominates if w and
do not balance
( )
( )
|
.
|

\
|
+

+

=
+

+

= +

w Gb t
Eb
t
w GA EI Q M m
2
12
3.2 Reasons of locking
Second reason
Kinematic equation:
Here, w is linear (set by N
1
and N
2
)
Then w becomes constant
The only solution for = constant
Zero shear if slenderness is towards infinity
=
dx
dw
4.1 Solving problem
The process
Formulation
FEM Implementation
Discretisation
Methods on implementation
Methods on discretisation
4.2 High Order functions
Change the discretisation scheme
Allow higher order terms in shape functions
needs not to be constant
Hierarchic shape functions
Nodal modes
Bubble modes
Advantages
4.3 Example
Maple sheet
4.4 Graph showing convergence of
p-method
Shapes of deflection with different orders considered
0
0.5
1
1.5
2
2.5
3
0 1 2 3 4 5
Length
D
e
f
l
e
c
t
i
o
n
1st order
2nd order
3rd order
Exact
5 Conclusion
Timoshenko beam theory is applicable for
both thick and thin beams
It suffers from severe locking behaviour
when linear shape functions are applied
directly
Employing high order functions can solve
the problem
6 Questions and
Answers
Your comments are also
welcomed