Second Order Nonlinear Analysis of Steel Tapered Beams Subjected to

Span Loading
Ali Hadidi
1
, Bahman Farahmand Azar, Hossein Zonouzi Marand
Department of civil engineering, University of Tabriz, Tabriz, Iran

Abstract
A second-order elastic analysis of tapered steel members with I-shaped sections subjected
to span distributed and concentrated loadings is developed. Fixed-end forces and moments as
well as exact stiffness matrix of tapered Timoshenko-Euler beam are obtained with exact
geometrical properties of sections. The simultaneous action of bending moment, shear and
axial force including P o effects is also considered in the analysis. A computer code has
been developed in MATLAB software using a power series method to solve governing
second-order differential equation of equilibrium with variable coefficients for beams with
distributed span loading. A generalized matrix condensation technique is then utilized for
analysis of beams with concentrated span loadings. The accuracy and efficiency of the results
of the proposed method are verified through comparing to those obtained from other

1
Corresponding Author: A. Hadidi
Department of civil engineering, University of Tabriz, Tabriz, Iran
Tel: +98-411-339 25 15, Email: alihadiditabriz@gmail.com

approaches such as finite element methods which indicates the robustness and time saving of
this method even for large scale frames with tapered members.

Keywords: Tapered beams; Span Loadings; Fixed end forces and moments; Stiffness
matrix; Second order analysis

1. Introduction
Tapered members are used in many structures such as sloped frames, bridges and
multi-story buildings as well as mechanical components. Because of the ease of construction,
the use of I-shaped members with a linearly variable depth of web is more practical;
moreover, weight optimization, flexibility in fabrication and design and sometimes satisfying
architectural considerations are some advantages which rolled members cannot provide.
Therefore, an exact analysis of structures containing this kind of members is very important.
On the other hand, according to the AISC-2010 [1], the required strengths of components of
structures should be determined by using a second-order analysis method. This kind of
analysis can consider flexural, shear and axial member deformations and both P A and
P o effects, and all gravity and other applied loads that may influence the stability of the
structure. Consequently, a direct analysis method for design of structures containing tapered
members which are subject to nodal and span loading is of high significance.
In addition to classic methods, in recent decades, different approaches have been
developed for second-order and buckling analysis of tapered members. Timoshenko and
Young [2] suggested to divide the tapered members to sub-elements for analyzing the
structure. Despite the simplicity of this method, they do not have the required precision for an
exact analysis (as illustrated in example 1).
Numerical methods such as finite element method (e.g. Bathe [3]) and direct integral
method (e.g. Karabalis [4]) have been used for producing stiffness matrix of member. These
methods achieve relatively good precision by choosing fine mesh in modeling; however, it is
time-consuming highly due to its great number of finite elements, especially in the case of
large structures. Therefore, these methods are not conducive to daily use because of high
computational costs.
AlGahtani [5] obtained axial, torsional and flexural stiffness matrix separately, as well
as fixed end forces and moments through solving governing equilibrium equations of member
based on the boundary integral method. This study considers the span loadings on tapered
beams, however, it ignores the second-order effects associated with P o and simultaneous
action of shear and bending deformation.
Li et al. [6-8] have solved tapered TimoshenkoEuler beam element using Chebyshev
Polynomial approach considering simultaneous effects of axial force, shear deformation and
P o effects with nodal loads. The exact stiffness matrix is derived based on beam-column
theories taking into account second-order effects in governing equilibrium differential
equation. This approach contains less computational effort and is also more time-saving and
practical in advanced analysis of structures; nevertheless, span loadings have not been
considered in this method despite their importance in practical analysis.
This paper, alternatively, takes into account not only nodal loads but also distributed
and concentrated span loads. A practical method for second-order analysis of steel tapered
members is presented considering the simultaneous effect of bending moments, axial forces
and shear deformations (including P o ). To fulfill this purpose, a power series method is
used to solve the equilibrium differential equation to obtain exact elastic stiffness matrix,
fixed end forces and moments. In the offered examples, the effect of axial pressure forces and
shear deformations is clearly observable in reduction of element stiffness. Although, only
elements with I-section and linear variation of depth is considered in this study; nevertheless,
the proposed method can be developed for other states. The algorithm presented in this paper
can be used for direct analysis method considering requirements based on AISC code [1].

2. Derivation of element formulation
The general form of members considered in this paper is shown in Fig. 1. which
reveals linearly symmetric tapered web and I-shaped section with constant width and
thickness of flanges. It is assumed that the element is braced laterally while local buckling of
the web and flanges is not taken into account. All elements are initially straight and the cross-
sections of the beam remain plane after deformation. Stiffness matrix and fixed end forces
and moments have been obtained for tapered members in this section. The element
formulation is based on the exact moment of inertia of section with no approximation.


Fig. 1. I-shaped section members with tapered web.

2.1. Geometrical properties of section
The exact formulation of area and inertia moment of the cross-section at location z as
shown in Fig. 1. are obtained as follows:

( ) ( )
2 . ( 2 ).
f f f w
A b t D t t = +
z z
(1)

( ) 3 3 2
( ) ( )
1 1
. 2 .( ) 2 .( ).( )
12 12 2
f
w f f w f f w
D t
I t D t b t t b t

= + +
z
z z
(2)

( ) ( )
.
w w
A D t =
z z
(3)
where
( ) 1
. D D s = +
z
z,
2 1
D D
s
L

= and
( ) w
A
z
is web area at location z and equal with
overall depth time web thickness (AISC-2010 [1]). In the most of existing researches,
approximate formulation has been used for calculation of inertia moment. This approximation
creates considerable error in structural analysis results including displacements and forces.
Some approximate formulas are shown in Appendix A.

2.2. Members subject to uniform distributed span loading
Tapered beam-column element of this research including uniform distributed span
loadings and applied conventions is shown in Fig. 2.

Fig. 2. Tapered beam of the paper, the used conventions and uniform span loadings

In deriving stiffness matrix and fixed end forces and moments of tapered members, the
simultaneous effect of bending moment and shear and axial force is considered. In so doing,
the equilibrium differential equation of the tapered Timoshenko-Euler beam element is
established, similar to Li at el. [6], in order to compare obtained relations. Eq. (4) is the
governing equation for the equilibrium of tapered TimoshenkoEuler beams without span
loadings (Li et al. [6-8]):

( ) ( ) ( ) 1 1 1
. . . . . ( . ) y N y N y Q M Q o | | '' ' =
z z z
z 0 L s s z (4)
Where
( ) ( ) ( )
. . E I o =
z z z
,
( )
( ) ( ) 2
( )
. .
.
w
w
A
E I
G A
|
'
=
z
z z
z
,
( )
( )
1
.
w
N
G A
= +
z
z

E and G respectively are elastic and shear modulus. In this section, the governing equilibrium
Eq. (4) is re-established taking into account uniform span loadings.
Element deflection consists of two sections, one is induced by the bending deformation, the
other by shear deformation; moreover, the axial deformation due to axial forces is taken into
account separately:

M Q
y y y = +
(5)
Second derivation of Eq. (5) Can be expressed as follows:

M Q
y y y '' '' '' = + (6)
Substituting
M
y '' and
Q
y '' terms by relations obtained from Eq. (7) and rearranging terms for
y '' , y ' and y , the governing equation for the equilibrium of tapered TimoshenkoEuler
beam is obtained as Eq. (8).
1 1
1 1
1
. . , ,
.
, ,
. .
. . 1
. .( . )
. .
s
M Q
w
s w
s s
w w
dM
M M Q M N y Q
d
M Q A
y y
E I G A A
M M Q N y A
y M N y Q M N y
E I G A A

= =

'' ' = = =
( '
'' '' '' ' ' = + + + +
(

( z)
( z) ( z) ( z)
( z) ( z) ( z)
( z) ( z) ( z)
( z) ( z)
( z) ( z)
( z) ( z) ( z)
z
z
z
(7)

( )
( ) ( ) ( ) 1 ( ) ( ) 1 1 ( )
( )
. . . . . ( ) . ( . )
0
w
s s s
w
A
y N y N y Q M M M Q M
A
L
o | |
(
'' ' ' '' = +
(
'
(

s s
z
z z z z z z
z
z
z
(8)
Where
s
M
( z)
is the moment created by span loadings at distance z from the left end of the
element and
( ) ( ) ( )
. . E I o =
z z z
,
( )
( ) ( ) 2
( )
. .
.
w
w
A
E I
G A
|
'
=
z
z z
z
,
( )
( )
1
.
w
N
G A
= +
z
z
.
For converting Eq. (8) to non-dimensional form Let
L
=
z
:
( ) 2 2 2
( ) ( ) ( ) 1 ( ) ( ) 1 1 ( )
( )
. . . . . . . ( ) . .( . . )
0 1
w
s s s
w
A
y L N y L N y L Q M M L M Q L M
A

o | |

(
'' ' ' '' = +
(
'
(

s s
(9)
Eq. (9) can be used for all tapered members with any sections and all forms of span loadings.
Using Eq. (10) for uniform span loadings ( q as Fig. 2.) and I-shaped section, Eq. (9) is
converted to Eq. (11), namely:

2
1
1
. , .
2
( . ). , .
s s s
w w w w
M q M q M q
A D s t A s t
' '' = = =
' = + =
( z) ( z) ( z)
( z) ( z)
z z,
z
(10)

2 2 2 2 2 1
( ) ( ) ( ) 1 1 1
1
. . . . . . . .( . ) .( . . . . )
2
D
y L N y L N y L Q q L M Q L q L
s

o | | '' ' = (11)
To solve differential equation Eq. (11), power series method is used for y , o and | :

( )
0
( )
0
( )
0
.
.
.
M
n
n
n
M
n
n
n
M
n
n
n
y y

o o
| |
=
=
=
=
=
=

(12)
Differentiating Eq. (12) term by term with respect to and substituting into Eq. (11), we
arrive at the result and after a further differentiation we have:
2
2 1
0 0 0 0 0
2 2 3 4 2 1
1 1 1
0
( 2 )( 1 ) . . . ( 1 ) . . . .
1
.( . ). . . . . . .
2
M n M n M
n n n
i n i i n i n
n i n i n
M
n
n
n
n i n i y L N n i y L N y
D
L Q q L M L Q q L
s
o |
|
+ +
= = = = =
=
( (
+ + +
( (

= + +

(13)
Separating out the terms corresponding to 0 n = , 1 n = and 2 n > , and then the equality of
relevant coefficients in two side of Eq. (13), it becomes:
For 0 n = ,

2 2 2
0 2 0 1 0 0 1 1
1
2 . . . . . . . ( . ) .
D
y L N y L N y L Q q L M
s
o | | = (14-1)
For 1 n = ,

2 2 3 1
0 3 1 2 0 2 1 1 1 1 1 1
6 . 2 . . (2 . . ) . . . ( . ) .
D
y y L N y y L N y L Q q L Q
s
o o | | | + + = + (14-2)
Finally for 2 n > ,
2
0 2 2 1
1 0
2 3 4 1
1 1
( 2)( 1) ( 2 )( 1 ) . . ( 1 ) . .
1 2
. ( . ) 2 . . .
2
n n
n i n i i n i n
i i
n n
n n y n i n i y L N n i y L N y
D
L Q q q L q L
s n
o o |
| |
+ + +
= =

+ + + + + +
(
= + +
(



(15)
Where
2
1
n
(
=
(

, for 2 n = and
2
0
n
(
=
(

, for 2 n > .
Recurrence relation for 2 n > using Eq. (15) can be written as:
2 2 3 4 1
2 1 1 1
0
2 0
1
1 2
. . ( 1 ) . . . ( . ) 2 . . .
2
( 2 )( 1 ) / ( 2)( 1)
n
n i n i n n n
i
n
i n i
i
D
y L N n i y L N y L Q q q L q L
s n
n i n i y n n
| | |
o o
+ +
=
+
=
(
= + + + + +

(
+ + + +
(

(16)
Thus, considering Eq. (16), it can be concluded that any
n
y (for 4 n > ) can be expressed in
linear combination of
0
y ,
1
y ,
2
y ,
3
y ,
1
Q and the constant value of
5
c as Eq. (17).

0 0 1. 1 2 2 3 3 4 1 5
. . . . . y c y c y c y c y c Q c = + + + + + (17)
Hereafter, these parameters must be obtained to determine y for different values of z . It
should also be mentioned that
1
M is unknown and appears in
n
y (for 4 n < ). From Eq. (7),
and considering:
M Q
y y y ' ' ' = + and
M
y

u ' = ,

1
. .
( )
( ) . ( )
w
Q q L L
y
G A

u

( +
' =
(

(18)
Using boundary condition and Eqs. (17,18),
For 0 = ,

0
(0) 0 y y = = (19)

1
1 1
(0)
(0) . (0)
w
Q L
y y
G A
u

(
' = =
(

(20)
For 1 = ,

1 1 2 2 3 3 4 1 5 2 1
(1) y c y c y c y c Q c o o = + + + + = (21)

1
6 1 7 2 8 3 9 1 10 2
(1)
(1) . (1)
w
Q L
y c y c y c y c Q c
G A
u

(
' = + + + + =
(

(22)
Using first relation of Eq. (12), separating out the terms corresponding to 4 n < , collecting all
the remaining terms under a single summation sign and considering Eq. (21) and (22):

1 2 3 1 1 2 2 3 3 4 1 5
4
1 2 3 6 1 7 2 8 3 9 1 10
4
(1)
(1) 2 3
m
i
i
m
i
i
y y y y y c y c y c y c Q c
y y y y iy c y c y c y c Q c
=
=

= + + + = + + + +

' = + + + = + + + +

(23)
Applying below conditions to Eq. (23), coefficients
1
c to
10
c are derived:

(0) (0)
1 2 3 1 5 10
4 4
(1) (1)
1 2 3 1 1 5 6 10
4 4
(2) (2)
2 1 3 1 2 5 7 10
4 4
(0) : 0: ,
(1) : 1, 0:1 , 1
(2) : 1, 0:1 , 2
m m
i i
i i
m m
i i
i i
m m
i i
i i
Condition y y y Q y c iy c
Condition y y y Q y c c iy c c
Condition y y y Q y c c iy c c
Conditio
= =
= =
= =
= = = = = =
= = = = + = + + = +
= = = = + = + + = +



(3) (3)
3 1 2 1 3 5 8 10
4 4
(4) (4)
1 1 2 3 4 5 9 10
4 4
(3) : 1, 0:1 , 3
(4) : 1, 0: ,
m m
i i
i i
m m
i i
i i
n y y y Q y c c iy c c
Condition Q y y y y c c iy c c
= =
= =
= = = = + = + + = +
= = = = = + = +


(24)
Now Eqs. (14-1),(14-2),(19),(20),(21) and (22) can be used for obtaining unknown factors
0
y ,
1
y ,
2
y ,
3
y ,
1
Q and
1
M in order to find function
( )
y
z
for all values of z .
2
Q and
2
M can
be found from equilibrium of element as,
2 1
. Q Q q L = (25)

2
2 1 1 2 1
1
. .( ) .
2
M M Q L N q L o o = + + + (26)
On the other hand axial stiffness matrix of element can be derived separately as,
[ ]
a a
a
a a
k k
K
k k
(
=
(

(27)
where
0
1
( )
a
L
E
k
d
A
=
}
z
z

Solving the obtained relations for
1
o ,
1
u ,
2
o and
2
u yields stiffness matrix and fix end forces
and moments in the following form as,

{ } | |{ } { }
F
P K P = A + (28)
where

11 12 13 14
21 22 23 24
31 32 33 34
41 42 43 44
0 0 0 0
0 0
0 0
[ ]
0 0 0 0
0 0
0 0
a a
a a
k k
k k k k
k k k k
K
k k
k k k k
k k k k
(
(
(
(
=
(

(
(
(
(

,
1
1
1
2
2
2
{ }
u
u
o
u
o
u
(
(
(
(
A =
(
(
(
(
(

,
1
1
2
2
0
{ }
0
F
F
F
F
F
Q
M
P
Q
M
(
(
(
(
= (
(
(
(
(

and
1
1
2
2
{ }
N
Q
M
P
N
Q
M
(
(
(
(
= (
(
(
(
(

(29)
It should be mentioned that by substituting Eqs. (25,26) into Eq. (28), we have,
| | | |
| | | |
31 32 33 34 11 12 13 14
41 42 43 44 21 11 22 12 23 13 24 14
2
2 1 2 1 1
. . . .
1
. , . .
2
F F F F F
k k k k k k k k
k k k k k k L N k k L k k L N k k L
Q Q q L M M Q L q L
=
= + + + + +
= = + +

(30)
In Eq. (29) | |
K , { } A , { } P and
{ }
F
P are elastic stiffness matrix of element, displacement
vector, force vector and fixed end forces and moments vector respectively;
1
u and
2
u are
axial displacement of element nodes. Component of stiffness matrix | |
K and vector
{ }
F
P are
represented in Appendix B. Stiffness matrix is symmetric and there is no need for calculating
all components of it. This subject is illustrated in example 1.

2.3. Members subject to concentrated span loading
In this part, a static condensation method is used for obtaining the stiffness matrix and
fix end forces and moments of the element. Macguir and Glagher [9] contracted the stiffness
matrix of an element with eliminating certain degrees of freedom. Similar approach is used to
establish formulation of the element with concentrated span loadings. To this purpose, the
element is divided into two parts at the concentrated load location, as Fig. 3., and the stiffness
matrix of each part is calculated from Eq. (29). Then, displacement quantities at division
section are eliminated so it becomes possible to calculate fix end forces and moments
independent of the intermediate displacement vector. Consequently, this approach requires
less number arithmetical operation than those with no condensing. It should be mentioned that
the stiffness matrix obtained from proposed approach is the same that is calculated through
Eq. (29). But in the presence of concentrated span loadings, fix end forces and moments are
obtained, besides, the stiffness matrix of element. The proposed formulation is established as
follows:

Fig. 3. Divided tapered beam with concentrated span loadings

The force-displacement relation of parts (a) and (b) are
| |{ } { }
1 1 1
K P A = and
| |{ } { }
2 2 2
K P A = , respectively, where

11 12 1 1
21 22 2 2
k k P
k k P
A (
=
` `
(
' ' A
) )
(31)
and

22 23 2 2
32 33 3 3
k k P
k k P
'' '' A (
=
` `
(
A
) )
(32)
| |
1
K and
| |
2
K are stiffness matrix of part (a) and (b), obtained by Eq. (29).
Assembling Equations (31) and (32) together,

11 12 1 1
21 22 23 2 2
32 33 3 3
0
0
k k P
k k k P
k k P
A (

(
A =
` `
(

( A
) )
(33)
which,

2 2 2
22 22 22
P P P
k k k
' '' = +
' '' = +
(34)
After, solving recent relation for
2
A and substituting it in the first and third rows of Eq. (33)
the following equation is obtained which is independent of
2
A ,

1 1 1
1 1 11 12 22 21 12 22 23 12 22 2
1 1 1
3 3 32 22 21 33 32 22 23 32 22 2
P k k k k k k k k k P
P k k k k k k k k k P


A (
= +
` ` ` (
A
) ) )
(35)
Obtained relation is in the form of
{ } | |{ } { }
F
P K P = A + where
{ }
F
P is fixed end forces and
moments,

{ }
1
12 22 2
1
32 22 2
F
k k P
P
k k P

=
`
)
(36)
And stiffness matrix
| |
K is,

1 1
11 12 22 21 12 22 23
1 1
32 22 21 33 32 22 23
[ ]
k k k k k k k
K
k k k k k k k


(
=
(


(37)
Example (2) indicated that matrix
| |
K is the same stiffness matrix of whole member with no
division. So it's enough to calculate
12
k ,
22
k and
32
k to find fixed end forces and moments. It
should be mentioned that axial stiffness matrix components can be calculated similar to the
previous section.

3. Numerical examples and verification
This section offers some examples to verify the accuracy of obtained relations; in this
measure, the deflection of beam-column elements in the proposed method are compared with
the results of other studies and finite element method. The examples also reveal the symmetry
of the stiffness matrix.

3.1. Beam-column subject to uniformly distributed span loadings
The tapered fixed-hinged beam in Fig. 4 is similar to Li et al. example [6], however, in
this study it is subject to uniform distributed span loadings where maximum deflection and its
location are calculated. Table 1 shows the comparison of the results of the proposed method
obtained in MATLAB [10] software to those of FEM with 50 and 10mm mesh size and also
to the beam subdivided to five segments of equivalent nodal loads. It also indicates the effect
of pressure axial force and shear deflection. To generate the results for verification, the
ABAQUS [11] four node shell element S4R is employed for modeling the beam as Fig. 5.
The results demonstrate an acceptable accuracy of the proposed method. The numbers in
parentheses show the location of maximum deflection along the element and the errors are
calculated compared to FEM with 10mm mesh size. The investigations revealed that choosing
number 14 for polynomial term is acceptable in calculating deflections. In all examples of this
paper, elastic and shear modulus are 206 and 80 KN/mm
2
respectively.



Fig. 4. Tapered beam with uniformly distributed span loadings

Fig. 5. Finite element model of tapered beam

Table 1
Maximum Deflection of fixed- hinged beam (mm)
Method Case A Case B Case C Case D Location(mm)*
Proposed method 2.085(1.8%)** 2.065 1.448 1.438 1845
Subdivided Beam 2.210(7.9%) 2.189 1.530 1.507 1800
FEM - mesh 50mm 2.047(0.05%) 2.038 1.396 1.389 1844
FEM - mesh 10mm 2.048( - ) 2.039 1.406 1.400 1844
Case A: Both axial and shear
B: No axial
C: No shear
D: No axial nor shear
* Maximum deflection location from first of beam (mm)
** Errors, calculated compared to FEM with 10mm mesh size.
Stiffness matrix
| |
K and fix end forces and moments
{ }
F
P are shown below; it can be seen
that matrix
| |
K is symmetric and also reduces computational efforts of calculation.
| |
6
1.1092 0 0 -1.1092 0 0
0 0.0183 34.9736 0 -0.0183 20.7742
0 34.9679 80920.2118 0 -34.9679 23983.4320
10
-1.1092 0 0 1.1092 0 0
0 -0.0183 -34.9736 0 0.0183 -20.7742
0 20.7799 24000.6566 0 -20.7799 38339.1768
K
(
(
(
(
=
(
(
(
(


{ }
6
.8000
-.3505
-241.6648
10
-.8000
-0.1894
0
P
(
(
(
(
=
(
(
(
(

{ }
-3
0
0
0
-0.7212
0
-2.5145 10
(
(
(
(
A =
(
(
(
(

{ }
6
0
-0.2983
-181.3579
10
0
-0.2417
96.4047
F
P
(
(
(
(
=
(
(
(
(



3.2. Beam-column subject to concentrated span loading
Calculating the deflection at mid-span of steel tapered fixed- hinged beam of Li et al.
[6] is considered in Fig. 6. The results of the proposed method are compared to those of FEM
with 50, 20 and 10mm mesh size and those of Li et al. study. Li et al. divided the member into
two parts and derived stiffness matrix of each part individually, they also utilized FEM by
dividing the element into 10 segments in its length to calculate deflection. Because of the
same axial loads in the two parts of the beam while dealing with elastic analysis, the stiffness
matrix of the whole member in this example is the same with the previous one.


Fig. 6. Tapered beam with concentrated span loadings

Table 2
Deflection at middle of fixed-hinged beam (mm)
Method Case A Case B Case C Case D
Proposed method 0.639(0.2%)* 0.636 0.409 0.407
FEM - mesh 300mm 0.642(0.6%) 0.640 0.367 0.365
FEM - mesh 50mm 0.637(0.2%) 0.635 0.398 0.396
FEM - mesh 10mm 0.638 0.636 0.401 0.399
Li (2 elem.) 0.672(5.3%) 0.669 0.409 0.408
(10 elem.) 0.673(5.5%) 0.671 0.411 0.410
Case A: Both axial and shear
B: No axial
C: No shear
D: No axial nor shear
*Errors: calculated compared to FEM with 10mm mesh.
3.3. Gable frame with tapered members and span loadings
This section takes into account a very applicable single bay gable frame shown in Fig.
7; Similar to previous examples the results were verified by ABAQUS with 50mm mesh size.
To this purpose, maximum deflection and normal stress at the tip and corner of the frame and
also the effects of shear deformations and P o on deflections are taken into consideration
(Table 3). These results evidently expose the efficiency of the proposed method in practical
problems. It should also be mentioned that, in the proposed method, the elements are modeled
symmetrically over their longitudinal axes.

Fig. 7. Gable frame with tapered members and span loadings





Table 3
Response of gable frame
Response Method
Case A
B C
tip corner
Deflection (mm)
Proposed method 11.12 (1.7%)* 2.57(0.4%) 11.09 10.40
FEM - mesh 50mm 10.93 2.58 10.91 10.24
Max. Stress (N/mm
2
)
Proposed method 53.52 (5.3%)* 58.06(0.5%) - -
FEM - mesh 50mm 50.83 57.75 - -
Case A: Both axial and shear
B: No axial
C: No shear
*Errors: calculated compared to FEM with 50mm mesh

4. Conclusions
This paper investigated second order non-linear analysis of tapered Timoshenko-Euler
beam-column element subjected to span loadings. Thus, a power series method was used to
solve governing differential equations of the member equilibrium. According to examined
examples, the appropriate number of terms for power series became 14 to achieve adequate
precision and speed. The effect of shear displacements and pressure axial forces in the
reduction of beam-column element stiffness are obviously recognizable in the solved
examples. The high speed of the proposed method, its adequate precision and accuracy, and
its simplicity in modeling make it a more effective and practical method compared to others
such as finite element method. The required analysis time of the proposed approach for the
first example is only 0.09 seconds, while it is 0.7 and 17 seconds for the finite element
method with 50 and 10 mm meshes , respectively. The offered method can be applied in 2-D
large scale practical structures and also be generalized to spatial ones.
Proposed formulation can also be derived for each section shape, nonlinear variation
of the section along member, and arbitrary distribution of span loadings. Therefore, member
weight can also be considered in the analysis. Future work should include material
nonlinearity and other conditions of steel design codes in order to achieve more advanced and
direct analysis of frames including tapered members.

Appendix A (Some approximate formula for moment of inertia)

a)
2
z f
z
I I
a
| |
=
|
\ .
where, .
1
f e
f e
I I
a L
I I
=

and
f
I and
e
I are moment of inertia at the ends of
the member (Saffari et al. [12])
b)
2
0
1
n
z
cz
I I
L
+
| |
= +
|
\ .
where
0
I is moment of inertia at the origin of element and c and
n depend on degree of tapering and shape of the cross section. (Al- Gahtani [5])
c)
2
1
1
1 ( 1)
n
z
H z
I I
H L
| |
= +
|
\ .
where
( )
( )
2 1
2 1
log
log
I I
n
H H
= (King at el. [13])
d) ( )
2
1 2 3 4 1 1 2 2 1 3 1 4 2
( ), , ( ) , 12 2, 12
z f w f f w
I z z D t D D l t b t t | | | | | | | | | | = + + = = = + =
(Saka [14])
e)
( ) , 1, 2,3
n
z f e f
z
I I I I n
L
| |
= + =
|
\ .
witch determined by the user. (Sap 2000 [15])
Appendix B (Component of stiffness matrix and fix end forces and moments)

| | | |
| |
0
11 4 1 12 5 10 13 11 14 2 0 3 1 11
2
21 2 1 22 4 10 23 21 24 3 11
31 32 33 34 11 12 13 14
41 42 43 44 21 11 22 12 23 13 24
1
( )
/ , / , , (6 ) /
/( ), /( ), , /( )
. . .
a L
E
k
d
A
k k L k k k L c c
k L k L k k k L
k k k k k k k k
k k k k k k L N k k L k k L N k
| o
| | | |
=
= = = =
= = = =
=
= + + + + +
}
z
z
| |
14
. k L

12
2 2
1 3 1 2 0 3 10 7 9 1 13 0 13 6 9 2 10
2
13 1 2 7 3 6 1 13
2 2
1 9 2 3 10 3 13 1 0 1 1 3 8 13 0 4 7
9 3 6 2 7 0 1 7 3 5 9 2 7
( 6 ( ) 6 ( )
( )) /( )
( / ) /( ) ( (2 ( / ) 2
( ) 2 ( ) / (
F
F
Q c q L c q L c c c c c c c c
q DL c c c c
M c c q L L qD Dq c c L c c
c c c c L c c c c N c c
o o
| |
| | | | | | o o
o
= + + +

= + + +
+
3 6 12 1
2
2 1 2 1 1
) / ) /
1
. , . .
2
F F F F F
c c
Q Q q L M M Q L q L
| +
= = + +

1 1 8 2 0 6 3 1 4 2 7 1
2
5 2 7 3 6 3 1 7 3 5 1 0 2 5 1 6 6 8 13 7 1
2
8 0 9 0 10 1 11 1 12 13
2 2 , 6 , . ( ),
( ) ( ) 6 ( ), / , .( )
. . , . , (0), (1), (0). . (0), (1). . (1)
w w
c N L L c
c c c c c c c c c c c c c L L L
L N L A G A G
o o |
o |
| | | |
= = = + =
= + + = + = +
= = = = = =

1 3 1 6 0 2 6 4 7 1 0 4 6 2 7 7 3 6 7 2 7 3 6 3 12
1 7 3 5 1 12 0 1 6 2 5 12
6 6 ( ) /
( ) / 6 ( ) /
c c c c c c c c c c L c c c c
L c c c c L c c c c
| o o
o
= + + + +



2 2
2 7 1 9 0 7 7 0 6 0 6 9 0 5 12 0 7 13 12 7 1 9 12
0 6 9 12
2 12 6 12 / 2 / /
6 /
c c c L c L c Nc
N c
| o o o o o
o
= + +
+

2
3 3 9 1 0 3 7 2 9 0 4 1 12 0 3 13 12
3 9 1 12 0 2 9 12
2 ( 3 ) 12 ( / ) 2 /
/ 6 /
c c c c c L c L
c N c N
| o o o
o
= + +
+

2
4 0 1 6 4 5 0 3 6 3 4 7 3 1 7 7 3 5 7 2 7 3 6 3 9
1 7 3 5 1 9 0 9 1 6 2 5 3 1 6 8 0 8 2 6 4 6 4 7 1 8
2 7 3 6 7 8
12 ( ) 2 ( ) ( )
( ) 6 ( ) 6 ( )
( )
c c c c c c c c c c c c c c
c c c c c c c c c c c c c c
c c c c
| o o
o o

= + +
+ + +
+


References
[1] AISC-2010, "Specification for Structural Steel Buildings", ANSI/AISC 360-10,
American Institute of Steel Construction, Chicago, IL.
[2] Timoshenko, S.P. & Young, D.H. (1965), "Theory of Structures", McGraw Hill Book
Co., Inc., New York, N.Y.
[3] Bathe, K.J. (1982), "Finite element procedures in engineering analysis", Prentice-Hall,
Inc., Englewood, N.J.
[4] Karabalis, D.L. (1983), "Static, dynamic and stability analysis of structures composed of
tapered beams", Computers & Structures, 16(6), 73148.
[5] Al-Gahtani, H.J. (1996), "Exact stiffness for tapered members" J. of Struct. Eng., ASCE,
122(10), 1234-39.
[6] Li, G.Q. & Li, J.J. (2002), "A tapered TimoshenkoEuler beam element for analysis of
steel portal frames", J. of Const. St. Research, 58(12), 1531-44.
[7] Li, J.J., Li, G.Q. & Chan, S.L. (2003), "A second-order inelastic model for steel frames of
tapered members with slender web", Engineering Structures, 25(8), 103343.
[8] Li, J.J. & Li, G.Q. (2007), " Advanced Analysis and Design of Steel Frames", John Wiley
& Sons Ltd.
[9] McGuire, W., Gallagher, R.H. & Ziemian, R. (1998), "Matrix Structural Analysis",
2nd Edition, John Wiley & Sons Ltd.
[10] Matlab V7.1 (2004), Users Manual, Mathworks Inc., USA.
[11]ABAQUS, V. 6.10 (2010), "Reference Manual", Dassault Systemes Simulia Corp., USA.
[12] Saffari, H., Rahgozar, R. & Jahanshahi, R. (2008), " An efficient method for computation
of effective length factor of columns in a steel gabled frame with tapered members", J. of
Const. Steel Research 64, 400406
[13] King, W.S., Chen, C.J., Duan, L. & Chen, W.F. (2006), " Plastic Analysis of frames with
Tapered members", J. of Arch. & Civil Eng., 23(2), 9-19.
[14] Saka, M.P. (1997), "Optimum design of steel frames with tapered members", Comp. &
Struct., 63(4), 797811.
[15] SAP2000, Ver. 14 (2009), Computers and Structures, Inc., Berkeley, California.
[16] Timoshenko, S.P. & Gere, J.M. (1961), "Theory of Elastic Stability", McGraw-Hill Book
Company, New York, N.Y.
[17] Chen W.F. & Lui, E.M. (1992), "Stability design of steel frames", Boca Raton, Florida,
CRC Press.
[18] Kim, S.E., Lee, J.S., Choi, S.H. & Kim, C.S. (2004), "Practical second-order inelastic
analysis for steel frames subjected to distributed load", Eng. Struct., 26, 5161.
[19]Jimenez Lopez, G.A. (1998), "Inelastic Stability of Tapered Structural Members", Ph. D.
Dissertation, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis-St. Paul, MN.
[20] Mohajer Rahbari, N., Talatahari, S. & Aalami, R. (2013), "Reliability Analysis of
Semiactive Magnetorheological Dampers Subjected to Harmonic Excitations", Advances
in Mech. Eng.,Volume 2013, Article ID 643927.
[21]Nouri, M. & Talatahari, S. (2013), "The Algebraic Riccati Matrix Equation for
Eigendecomposition of Canonical Forms", Mathematical Problems in Engineering,
Volume 2013, Article ID 176389.