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

net/publication/276297744

A large torsion beam finite element model for tapered thin-walled open
cross sections beams

Article  in  Engineering Structures · May 2015

DOI: 10.1016/j.engstruct.2015.04.039

CITATIONS READS

8 743

3 authors:

Foudil Mohri Sid ahmed Meftah

University of Lorraine University of Sidi-Bel-Abbes
58 PUBLICATIONS   448 CITATIONS    35 PUBLICATIONS   317 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Noureddine Damil
Université Hassan II de Casablanca
137 PUBLICATIONS   1,735 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

Asymptotic Numerical Method View project

Padé approximants View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Noureddine Damil on 16 October 2017.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 Engineering Structures 99 (2015) 132–148

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Engineering Structures
journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/engstruct

A large torsion beam finite element model for tapered thin-walled open
cross sections beams
Foudil Mohri a,⇑, Sid Ahmed Meftah b, Noureddine Damil c
a
Université de lorraine, LEM3, UMR CNRS 7239, Ile du Saulcy, 57045 Metz, France
b
Laboratoire des Structures et Matériaux Avancés dans le Génie Civil et Travaux Publics, Université de Djellali Liabes, Sidi Bel Abbes, Algeria
c
Laboratoire d0 Ingénierie et Matériaux LIMAT, Faculté des Sciences Ben M0 Sik, Université Hassan II de Casablanca, BP 7955, Sidi Othman, Casablanca, Morocco

a r t i c l e i n f o a b s t r a c t

Article history: A 3D finite element beam element model is investigated for the behavior, the buckling and the
Received 16 September 2014 post-buckling analyses of thin-walled tapered beams with open cross sections. For the purpose, a
Revised 17 March 2015 non-linear model is performed in large torsion context according to a new kinematics that accounts
Accepted 22 April 2015
for large torsion, flexural–torsional coupling and the presence of tapering terms in bending and torsion.
The equilibrium equations are carried out and new tapering stress resultants are then present. This model
is extended to finite element formulation in the same circumstances. 3D beams elements with two nodes
Keywords:
and seven degrees of freedom per node are adopted. Due to large torsion assumption and flexural–tor-
Finite element
Non-linear
sional coupling, new matrices are established in both the geometric and the initial stress parts of the tan-
Open cross section gent stiffness matrix. The Arclength method is adopted as solution strategy of the non-linear equations.
Post-buckling Many applications are presented that deal with the behavior, the buckling and the post-buckling equilib-
Stability rium. Comparisons are made with some available solutions and with shell elements of a commercial
Tapered beam code. The bifurcation points are in accordance with non-linear stability solutions. Moreover, the present
Thin-walled beam element is also compared to similar tapered beam finite element without the new tapering terms. The
proposed beam element is efficient and accurate in both linear and non-linear behavior analyses. It fol-
lows a non negligible gain in computation time especially when the post-buckling behavior is performed.
Ó 2015 Published by Elsevier Ltd.

1. Introduction either prismatic or tapered is governed by lateral buckling failure

Prismatic structural elements have been conventionally
adopted in frames structures. In the design stage, the element cross
section is chosen to resist the high stresses at a single location of
the member, although the stresses may be considerably lower else-
where. Nowadays, engineer and designer are asked for intelligent
uses and material savings in order to reduce the impact of con-
struction industry on the environment and improve the carbon
footprint. Recourse to tapered elements is a good compromise.
All current materials from steel, concrete wood and glass are con-
cerned by this opportunity. The automatic welding in steel, indus-
trial fabrication of concrete structures and multilayer timber
beams combined with higher aesthetic consideration and drastic
weight reduction are helped in decision of project stakeholders.
Moreover, the relatively higher material strength leads inher-
ently to thin-walled slender elements. The structural behavior
and strength of the vast majority of laterally unrestrained beams
⇑ Corresponding author.
E-mail address: foudil.mohri@univ-lorraine.fr (F. Mohri).
involving flexural–torsional coupling combined with the warping
phenomenon. Efficient tools are available for the behavior and lat-
eral buckling resistance of prismatic thin-walled beams. The liter-
ature is rich in both theory [1–4], numerical models [5–9] and
recommendations in design codes [10–12]. Validation and models
comparisons are available in [13–19]. The list is certainly not
exhaustive and it is possible to find other relevant works on these
fields.
However, the behavior and the stability of tapered beams is dif-
ferent than prismatic beams and it is rather difficult task for many
reasons: (1): From analytical point of view, the equilibrium equa-
tions are more complicate to apprehend in presence of variable
stiffness coefficients and it is very difficult to get easy practical
solutions. The problem is more difficult in lateral buckling stability
where flexural–torsional coupling is taken into consideration. (2):
A possible convenient method to assess the behavior of a tapered
beam by dividing such a beam into several segments and take each
of these segments as an equivalent prismatic beam always fail. In
this method, the effects of tapering could not be completely taken
into account and can lead to incorrect results, and (3): Therefore, it

http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.engstruct.2015.04.039
0141-0296/Ó 2015 Published by Elsevier Ltd.
 F. Mohri et al. / Engineering Structures 99 (2015) 132–148
is not surprising that in the design codes, as in the European code
Eurocode 3 [12], no recommendations are dressed for the case of
tapered beams strength.
It becomes necessary to develop an efficient method for the
behavior and stability either in buckling and lateral buckling of
these valuable elements. The early tapered member study is the
torsional behavior of the flat plates carried out by Nadai [20] and
Lee [21,22] for the torsion of I-beams. Cywinski [23] studied the
torsion strength of mono-symmetric I-beams with variable cross
sections and Bazant [24] investigated the case of tapered beams
with arbitrary variable cross sections. Based on some approxima-
tions, Brown [25] and Chan [26] adopted models for prismatic
thin-walled tapered beams. In these models, both displacements
and cross section parameters are discritized via polynomial
shape functions. Sapalas [27] investigated a model of tapered
beam-columns subjected to bending and axial forces where the
buckling loads are carried out by the help of standard prismatic
beams or shell elements and an additional correction tapering
factors.
Moreover, in presence of variable cross section stiffness, many
authors established the equilibrium equations with variable coeffi-
cients. Functions with high degree of non-linearity on the axial
beam variable were adopted in discretization [28–31]. More
recently, Asgarian [32] and Soltani [33] adopted successfully the
power series method as solution approach in the stability and
vibration of tapered beams with arbitrary cross sections and
boundary conditions. The results are close to finite shell elements.
In the previous models, kinematics of a prismatic beam is
adopted for the tapered beams and the tapering is taken into
account in the equilibrium equations with consideration of vari-
able cross section stiffness in the axial direction. Kitipornchai and
Trahair [34,35] investigated the pure torsion and the lateral buck-
ling behaviors of tapered beams with doubly and mono-symmetric
I cross sections. This approach is quite different than previous since
the tapering effect is considered separately and an additional term
is present in the twist equilibrium equation of the classical Vlasov’s
torsion equation. These papers constitute still today a major contri-
bution to the thin-walled tapered beams problem. Bradford [36]
investigated a finite element model for thin-walled beams with
open variable cross sections. Ronagh [37,38] extended the Vlasov’s
model to the case of moderate torsion amplitudes and investigated
a finite element procedure for thin-walled tapered beams with dou-
bly symmetric cross sections. More recently, Andrade [39] presented
a variational formulation to analyze the elastic lateral–torsional
buckling behavior of mono-symmetric thin-walled tapered beams.
Comparisons with shell elements were made in [40]. For tapered
beam behavior and stability analyses, analytical solutions are rather
scant. They can be found in [21,41–43]. Recent research on stability
with recommendations in design can be found in Marques [44],
Trahair [45] and Kováč [46].
Tapered beam behavior is qualitatively different than prismatic
beam behavior. A fact that precludes uses of prismatic finite ele-
ment models. In addition, this qualitative difference combined with
the non evidence of the comprehensive kinematics has stirred a fair
amount of controversy among the structural stability research com-
munity, mostly regarding kinematical aspects [37,47,48].
Most of the previous works have been performed according to
linear stability models and only the buckling loads are regarded
and the recourse to shell element simulations is more frequent in
the validation process. Buckling loads are then derived only from
solutions of the eigenvalue problem without considering imperfec-
tions. The resulting solutions show a qualitative estimation of the
true buckling loads and must considered cautiously. For accurate
buckling loads, it is necessary that eigenvalue problem solutions
must be compared to bifurcations observed on the non-linear
load–deflection response of the member in pre and post-buckling
133
ranges, with eventually accounting for imperfections. Unfortunately,
this last process is very difficult to obtain. It needs more time
computation and becomes additionally more cumbersome when
3D shell elements are used, since specific data preparation and
mesh process are necessary for each tapered beam. For these rea-
sons, results on the post-buckling behavior of tapered beams are
scant in literature. Based on author’s paper [8] investigated for
large torsion of thin-walled beams with prismatic beams and the
extension of the original kinematics investigated in [43], a new
beam finite element is performed here for the non-linear behavior
of tapered thin-walled beams. Compared to the classical tapered
beam models, new tapering terms are present. The backgrounds
of the model are first detailed and the equilibrium equations are
derived from the minimum of the potential energy principle.
Based on specific shape functions adopted for the 3D displace-
ments components and the twist angle and in order to make
possible the post-buckling behavior analysis, the finite element
formulation of the equilibrium is carried out without any assump-
tion on the twist angle amplitude. The solution strategy of the
non-linear system is described and the tangent stiffness matrices
are derived. Many illustrative examples are considered. They con-
cern the torsion behavior, the buckling and post-buckling behavior
of tapered beams. Comparisons are made with some benchmark
solutions and with Abaqus 3D shell elements. The limits of the
buckling loads carried out from solutions of the classical eigen-
value problem are remarked. Since the model novelty lies on the
new additional tapering terms, the influence of these terms in
the behavior, buckling and post-buckling analyses are performed
and comparison to a similar beam model formulated without the
aforementioned terms is extensively studied. The efficiency and
the accuracy of the present model in bifurcation analysis and in
the post-buckling strength are outlined.
2. Kinematics
In the study, we consider a tapered beam with a thin-walled
open cross section and 3D referential Oxyz is used (Fig. 1). This ref-
erential is fixed in an arbitrary origin O. The beam is subjected on
its contour to 3D forces leading to arbitrary displacements compo-
nents u, v, w and h, where h denotes the twist angle. Consider M, a
point on the section contour with its co-ordinates (y, z, x), with x
being the sectorial co-ordinate. It is admitted that there is no shear
deformations in the mean surface of the section and the contour of
the cross-section is rigid in its own plane. The model will be
applied to slender beams. This means that local and distortional
deformations are not included. Thin-walled open section beams
possess large bending stiffness compared to the torsion strength.
As in [8], the displacements and the twist angle can be large but
bending rotations are assumed to be small. Under these conditions,
displacements of a point M are derived from those of the origin by:
uM ¼ u  yðv ;x þ v ;x c þ w;x sÞ  zðw;x þ w;x c  v ;x sÞ  xh;x þ uaM
ð1Þ
v M ¼ v  zs þ yc ð2Þ
wM ¼ w þ ys þ zc ð3Þ
In these relationships, ð:Þ;x denotes the x-derivative. We have intro-
duced in (1)–(3) two additional variables c and s:
c ¼ cos h  1 s ¼ sin h ð4; 5Þ
Relationships (1)–(3) are similar to that used in Mohri [8] for pris-
matic beams with a specific additional term uaM present in Eq. (1)
resulting from tapering in y and z directions where the slopes oper-
ate (Fig. 1b and c). This additional tapering term is defined by
134 F. Mohri et al. / Engineering Structures 99 (2015) 132–148

(a) (b) (c)

ML
qz qy z x
x
M
qx M(x,y,z,ω) z(x)
z y(x)
M0 wM M
x
M vM y
ω/2 O O
uM

y
O w
x O v
u θ

Fig. 1. Thin-walled beam with open cross section: (a): view of reference axes, displacement components and 3D loads, (b, c): tapering slope coordinates.

 
uaM ¼ ðyy;x þ zz;x Þc  ðzy;x  yz;x Þs ð6Þ @x
2exz ¼ y  h;x  Xz ð12Þ
@z
The proofs of (6) are detailed in Appendix A. It is important to
mention here, that in presence of tapering, reference is made here In Eq. (10), ky and kz are bending curvatures, defined by:
to an arbitrary point O and no reference is made to the centroid
ky ¼ w;xx þ w;xx c  v ;xx s kz ¼ v ;xx þ v ;xx c þ w;xx s ð13—14Þ
and shear points as done in Mohri [8]. In Ronagh [37], a theoretical
model is investigated for the behavior and the stability of tapered r is the distance from the point M to the origin O
thin-walled beams with open cross sections. The displacements of
r ¼ y2 þ z2
2
ð15Þ
the prismatic beam investigated in Attard [49] are then admitted.
Based on a comparison of author’s kinematics (1)–(3) and similar In previous equations, ð:Þ;xx denotes the second x-derivative. In
adopted in Ronagh [37], the kinematics are similar to (1)–(3) but shear strains (11), (12), one obtains some additional terms Xy and
the tapering term uaM is absent. However, the additional term (6) Xy than those admitted in literature
is more complete than the tapering term used in [43] where only
web tapered beams were studied. Xy ¼ y;x c þ z;x s Xz ¼ z;x c  y;x s ð16—17Þ
In prismatic beams with a constant cross section, let us remind Ronagh [37] adopted a different expression for the axial strain exx .
that the cross-section characteristics (y, z, x) are constant and only The outlined part in (10) is very different and the last term
displacements depend upon the axial variable x. In presence of a ðy2;x þ z2;x Þc has been omitted. In the tangential strains (11), (12),
tapered beam, both displacements and cross section dimensions
terms Xy and Xy are absent.
are x-dependant. This must be taken into consideration in the for-
The strain components are now carried out according to
mulation. In the case of thin-walled beams in large displacements
author’s kinematics (1)–(3). According to (7–9), one needs for the
context, the components of the strain tensor are reduced to the fol-
derivatives of uaM with respect to x; y and z. These derivatives will
lowing ones:
  be added respectively to the strain components derived previously
exx ¼ uM;x þ 12 ðuM;x Þ2 þ ðv M;x Þ2 þ ðwM;x Þ2  uM;x in (10)–(12). Referred to (7–9), the additional strain eaxx due to
  effect of uaM in exx is then:
þ 12 ðv M;x Þ2 þ ðwM;x Þ2 ð7 — 9Þ eaxx ¼ uaM;x
2exy ¼ uM;y þ v M;x þ v M;x v M;y þ wM;x wM;y
¼ ðyy;x þ zz;x Þc;x þ ðyy;x þ zz;x Þ;x c  ðzy;x  yz;x Þs;x
2exz ¼ uM;z þ wM;x þ v M;x v M;z þ wM;x wM;z
 ðzy;x  yz;x Þ;x s ð18aÞ
At this stage, it is important to study the effect of the additional
tapering term uaM present in Eq. (1) on the strain components From the definition of the trigonometric functions c and s (4, 5), one
(7–9). For this aim, the strains are carried out firstly according to gets:
the kinematics (1)–(3) without uaM . In a second time, the strain
c;x ¼ ðsin hÞh;x ¼ sh;x s;x ¼ ðcos hÞh;x ¼ ðc þ 1Þh;x ð18b; cÞ
components are computed according to the full kinematics (1)–(3)
where the term uaM is considered. And in presence of linear tapering, one has:
When the term uaM is absent in (1), the strain components of the
tapered beam are computed according to (7–9). After needed ðyy;x þ zz;x Þ;x ¼ y2;x þ z2;x ðzy;x  yz;x Þ;x ¼ 0 ð18d; eÞ
developments and simplifications, on arrives to the following expres-
So:
sions for the strain components exx ; exy and exz (see Appendix B)
eaxx ¼ ðyy;x þ zz;x Þsh;x þ ðy2;x þ z2;x Þc þ ðyz;x  zy;x Þðc þ 1Þh;x ð18fÞ
exx ¼ u;x  ykz  zky  xh;xx  y;x v ;x  z;x w;x
  This term is then added to (10) to get:
 x;x þ ðyz;x  zy;x Þc  ðzz;x þ yy;x Þs h;x
1 2  exx ¼ u;x  ykz  zky  xh;xx  y;x v ;x  z;x w;x
þ v ;x þ w2;x þ r2 h2;x  ðy2;x þ z2;x Þc ð10Þ  
2  x;x þ ðyz;x  zy;x Þc  ðzz;x þ yy;x Þs h;x
  1 2 
@x þ v þ w2;x þ r2 h2;x  ðy2;x þ z2;x Þc þ eaxx ð18gÞ
2exy ¼  z þ h;x  Xy ð11Þ 2 ;x
@y
 F. Mohri et al. / Engineering Structures 99 (2015) 132–148 135

exx ¼ u;x  ykz  zky  xh;xx  y;x v ;x  z;x w;x terms are proportional to v ;x and w;x , they certainly influence
  the bending behavior. Again, with the present model, one justifies
 x;x þ ðyz;x  zy;x Þc  ðzz;x þ yy;x Þs h;x
the presence of the classical tapering term Xx . It is well known
1 2 
that this term, proportional to h;x contributes only in the torsion
þ v ;x þ w2;x þ r2 h2;x  ðy2;x þ z2;x Þc  ðyy;x þ zz;x Þsh;x
2 behavior. Based on a linearized version of the equilibrium, the
þ ðy2;x þ z2;x Þc þ ðyz;x  zy;x Þðc þ 1Þh;x ð18hÞ contribution of the different tapering terms in the equilibrium is
detailed in section 5.2. In the following, the equilibrium equations
After needed simplifications and pooling terms in h;x , one arrives to:
of the beam are derived according to the kinematics (1)–(3) and
1 2  strain components 20, 22 and 23.
exx ¼ u;x  ykz  zky  xh;xx þ v ;x þ w2;x þ r2 h2;x
2
 ðy;x v ;x þ z;x w;x Þ  Xx h;x ð19aÞ 3. Equilibrium equations

where: 3.1. Equilibrium weak form

Xx ¼ ðzy;x  yz;x þ x;x Þ ð19bÞ
The equilibrium equations are derived from the stationary con-
Here, Xx is exactly the same torsional tapering term present in ditions of the total potential energy carried out from the strain
Kitipornchai [34,35] and Yang [50]. For the equilibrium, the follow- energy and the external load variations dU and dW:
ing expression of exx is preferred:
dU  dW ¼ 0 ð24Þ
1
exx ¼ e0  ykz  zky  xh;xx þ r 2 h2;x In a first stage, the equilibrium equations are established in the case
2
of arbitrary coordinate system. But in finite element procedure, the
 ðy;x v ;x þ z;x w;x Þ  Xx h;x ð20aÞ
model is applied to the case of tapered beams with doubly symmet-
With e0 is the membrane component defined by: ric cross section with load applied on the beam centerline (Fig. 2a).
The strain energy variation is:
1 2 
Z Z
e0 ¼ u;x þ v ;x þ w2;x ð20bÞ
2 dU ¼ ðrxx dexx þ 2rxy dexy þ 2rxz dexz ÞdAdx ð25Þ
L A
Let us remind again that for a prismatic beam, the terms y;x v ;x ; z;x w;x
and Xx h;x vanish. One gets the expression of the strain of Mohri [8]. Integration is done over the cross section A and the beam length L.
For the tangential deformation components exy and exz , the same rxx ; rxy and rxz are the Piola–Kirchhoff stress tensor components,
procedure is followed in order to include the effect of the dexx ; dexy ; dexz are Green’s strain tensor variations, carried out in
additional tapering term uaM . According to (8) and (9), the following (20), (22) and (23). Their virtual variations are the following
partial derivatives are needed.  
dexx ¼ de0  ydkz  zdky  xh;xx þ 12 r2 dðh2;x Þ  y;x dv ;x þ z;x dw;x þ Xx dh;x
   
uaM;y ¼ y;x c þ z;x s uaM;z ¼ z;x c  y;x s ð21a; bÞ
2dexy ¼  z þ @@yx dh;x 2dexz ¼ y  @@zx dh;x
One can remark that these derivatives are exactly the same to the ð26 — 28Þ
non classical tapering terms Xy and Xz obtained in (16–17).
Adding (21a,b) to (11) and (12), one gets easily: In beam theory, it is more convenient to formulate the strain energy
    variation in terms of the stress resultants (section forces) acting
@x @x over the cross-section area. Based on virtual strain deformation
2exy ¼ zþ h;x 2exz ¼ y h;x ð22—23Þ
@y @z components and after integration over the cross-section A, the
There is no tapering term in shear components. Again, one strain energy variation (25) is given by:
assesses that without the contribution of the additional term uaM Z 
1
obtained in the axial displacement (1), the shear deformation dU ¼ Nde0  M y dky  Mz dkz þ M sv dh;x þ Bx dh;xx þ M r dðh;x Þ2
L 2
(22–23) admitted in tapered thin-walled literature are not possi- 
Ny0 dv ;x  Nz0 dw;x  MX dh;x dx ð29Þ
ble. Let us remind that the author’s kinematic leading to strain
components (20), (22) and (23) is more rich than the classical N is the axial force, M y and M z are the bending moments, Bx is
kinematic adopted in literature, where only torsional tapering the bimoment acting on the cross-section and M sv is the St-Venant
Xx h;x is present. With the original kinematic (1)–(3) and the addi- torsion moment (Fig. 2b). M r is a higher order stress resultant
tional term uaM , new bending terms (y;x v ;x þ z;x w;x ) are present in called Wagner’s moment. They are defined below in terms of stress
exx in addition to the classical tapering term Xx h;x . Since these resultants and associate coordinates.

(a) (b) (c)

Fig. 2. Thin-walled beam with doubly symmetric open cross section with position of reference axes (a), classical stress resultants (b) and applied loads on beam centerline (c).
136 F. Mohri et al. / Engineering Structures 99 (2015) 132–148

R R R
N¼ A
rxx dA; My ¼ A
rxx zdA; Mz ¼ A
rxx ydA; are principal coordinates most of the constants vanish and the
R R  @x
 
terms of the system (37) are:
Bx ¼  A rxx xdA; M sv ¼ A
rxz ðy  @z
Þ  rxy z þ @@yx dA;
R 8 9 2 38 9
M r ¼ A rxx r 2 dA > N > A 0 0 0 0 Ir 0 0 0 >
> e0 > >
>
> >
> >
> >
>
>
> M >
> 60 Iy 0 0 0 0 0 tzz0 0 7 >
> ky > >
ð30a-fÞ >
> y >
> 6 7>
> >
>
>
> >
> 6 7>
> >
>
>
> M >
> 6 0 0 I z 0 0 0 t yy 0 0 0 7>
> k z >
>
>
>
z >
> 6 >
7> >
>
Similarly, N y0 ; Nz0 and MX are the additional tapering forces, defined >
> >
> 6 GJ 7>
> h ;x >
>
< M sv >
> = 60
6
0 0 E
0 0 0 0 0 7
7
>
< >
=
by: Bx 6
¼ E6 0 0 0 0 Ix 0 0 0 7
t Xx 7 h ;xx
Z Z Z >
>
>
>
> 6 > h2 >
7> >
>
> M > > 6 AI0 0 0 0 0 Ir 0 0 0 7> > ;x > >
N y0 ¼  rxx y;x dA; Nz0 ¼  rxx z;x dA; MX ¼  rxx Xx dA > r >
> >
> 6 >2 >
7>
> >
>
>
> > 60 0 7 > >
A A A > N y0 >
> >
> 6 0 t yy0 0 0 0 ty0 y0 0 > v ;x >
7>
> >
>
>
> >
> 6 7>
> >
>
ð31a-cÞ > N
> z >0 >
> 4 0 t zz0 0 0 0 0 0 t 0
zz 0 0 5> w;x >
> >
>
: ; >
> >
>
MX 0 0 0 0 t Xx 0 0 0 tXX : ;
h;x
We admit that the external loads in (Fig. 2c) are equivalent to 3D
ð38Þ
distributed loads (qx ; qy ; qz Þ, distributed moments (mxe ; mye ; mze Þ
and a warping moment (bimoment bxe Þ applied on beam centerline. In the present work, the system (38) is adopted. This means that the
Their components are proportional to a parameter k. The external coordinates y, z and x are uncoupled and that the referential is cho-
load variations dW is given by: sen with the origin in cross section centroid and coordinate axes y
Z
 and z are principal bending axes. Most of cross section constants
dW ¼ k f xe du þ f ye dv þ f ze dw þ mxe dhx þ mye dw;x
L (excluded the tapering terms) are defined in Mohri [8]. The addi-
þmze dv ;x þ bxe dh;x Þdx ð32Þ tional tapering terms (t zz0 ; tyy0 ; t Xx ; ty0 y0 ; tz0 z0 ; t XX Þ are defined by:
R R
In order to perform the finite element approach, the matrix formu- ty0 y0 ¼ A
y2;x dA t yy0 ¼ A
yy;x dA
R R
lation of the equilibrium is necessary. For the purpose, the following t z0 z0 ¼ z2 dA
A ;x
t zz0 ¼ A
zz;x dA ð39a-fÞ
work vectors are introduced: R 2 R
tXX ¼ A
dAX t Xx ¼ A
XxdA

fSgt ¼ N M y M z M sv Bx M r N y0 Nz0 MX
n o
fcgt ¼ e0  ky  kz h;x h;xx 1 2
h
2 ;x
v ;x w;x h;x 4. Finite element implementation of the equilibrium
fqgt ¼ f u v wh g
4.1. Equilibrium equations
f/gt ¼ f u;x v ;x w;x h;x v ;xx w;xx h;xx hg
fF e gt ¼ f F xe F ye F ze Mxe g The equilibrium system (35) and the elastic material behavior
fMe gt ¼ f 0 M ze M ye Bxe 0 0 0 0g (38) are performed in the context of large torsion. They are func-
ð33a-fÞ tion of vectors {q}, {c}, {/} and their variations {dq}, {dc}, {d /}.
In these trial vectors, a particular attention is shown to vector
fagt ¼ f c sg ð34Þ {/} defined in (33b). This vector is highly non-linear in presence
of large torsion and flexural torsional coupling. According to defini-
In (33a-f), {S} and {c} define stress and deformation vectors. Vectors tion of its non-linear components ky , kz and e0 , respectively in (15)
{q} and {/} are displacement and gradient vectors. Load forces are and (20), it can be split in three parts: linear, quadratic and flexu-
arranged in two components {F e } and {M e } which are the conjugate ral–torsional parts as:
of {q} and {/}. The last ‘‘torsion’’ vector {a} includes large torsion 8 9 8 9 8 2 9 8 9
trigonometric functions (c and s). Based on basic definitions of dU >
>
e0 > > >
> u;x >
> >
> v ;x þ w2;x >
> >
> 0 >
>
>
> > > > > > > >
and dW derived in (29) and (32), and according to vector definitions >
> ky > >
>
>
>
> w >
>
>
>
>
> 0 >
>
>
>
>
> w c  v s >
>
>
>
> >
> >
>
;xx >
> >
> >
> >
>
;xx ;xx >
>
(33a-f), (34), one gets the following matrix formulation of the equi- > k >
> > >>  v >
> >
> >
> >
> v c þ w s >
>
>
> z >
> >
> ;xx >
> >
> 0 >
> >
> ;xx ;xx >
>
>
>h > >
> >> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
librium (24): >
> > >
> h >
> >
> 0 >
> >
> 0 >
>
Z Z Z  < ;x = < ;x = 1< = < =
fcg ¼ h;xx ¼ h;xx þ 0  0
fdcgt fSgdx  k fdqgt fF e gdx þ fd/gt fM e gdx ¼ 0 ð35Þ >
> > > > >
2> 2 > > >
L L L > 1 h2 >
> > >
> >
> 0
>
>
> >
> h;x
>
>
>
>
>
> 0
>
>
>
>
> 2 ;x >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
>
>v > >
> >>
> v ;x > >
> >
>0 >
> >
> >
>
>
> ;x > > > >
> >
> >
> 0 >
>
>
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
3.2. Elastic stress resultants definitions
>w >
> > >> w;x > > >0
> > >
> >0 >
>
>
> ;x >
> > > > > > >
: ; >: >
; >
: ; >
> : >
;
h;x h;x 0 0
In the case of elastic linear behavior, with E and G the Young’s
and shear modulus, we have: These three parts can written in terms of vector {/} as
8 9 2 38 9
< rxx >
> = E 0 0 > < exx >
= 
1

rxy ¼ 6
4
7
G 0 5 exy ð36Þ fcg ¼ ½H þ ½Að/Þ  ½Aa ðaÞ f/g
2
ð40Þ
>
: >
; >
: >
rxz G exz ;
Matrices [H] and [A(h)] are classical matrices in non-linear struc-
When the 3D referential is arbitrary and according to definition of tural mechanics. The last matrix [Aa (a)] takes into account for large
stress resultants (30) and (31), the stress vector {S} defined in torsion and flexural–torsional coupling. All these matrices are
(33a) can be put in terms of {c} vector as: (9  8) array. The non vanished terms of these matrices are listed
fSg9;1 ¼ ½D9;9 fcg9;1 ð37Þ below:
Hð1; 1Þ ¼ 1; Hð2; 6Þ ¼ Hð3; 5Þ ¼ 1,
[D] is the elastic material behavior matrix. It depends on elastic Hð4; 4Þ ¼ Hð5; 7Þ ¼ Hð7; 2Þ ¼ Hð8; 3Þ ¼ Hð9; 4Þ ¼ 1;
constants and cross section characteristics. In arbitrary axes, the Að1; 2Þ ¼ v ;x Að1; 3Þ ¼ w;x Að6; 4Þ ¼ h;x .
[D] matrix is full, but in the case of the coordinate (y, z and x) Aa ð2; 5Þ ¼ s Aa ð2; 6Þ ¼ c Aa ð3; 5Þ ¼ c Aa ð3; 6Þ ¼ s
 F. Mohri et al. / Engineering Structures 99 (2015) 132–148 137

Applying the variation to (40) and using the fact that the matri-
ces [A(/)] and [Aa (a)] are linearly dependant on vectors {/} and
{a}, the {dc} vector needed in the weak form of the equilibrium
(35) is established as:
fdcg ¼ ½Hfd/g þ ½Að/Þfd/g  ½Aa ðaÞfd/g  ½Aa ðdaÞf/g
The last term in the right hand side of (41) can be written in terms
of {d/} as indicated below. In a first stage, vectors {da} and {/} are
permuted by a simple operation:
h i
b
½Aa ðdaÞf/g ¼ Að/Þ fdag
h i
b {/} are related to element dof frge by:
The matrix Að/Þ is linearly dependant on {/} components. The
non vanished terms are:
4.2. Finite element approach of the equilibrium
In literature about thin-walled beams with open section, warp-
ing deformation is of primary importance. For this reason, the
warping is considered as an additional independent displacement
ð41Þ
with regard to classical 3D beams. In mesh process, 3D beams ele-
ments with two nodes and 7 degrees of freedom (dof) per node are
adopted as in [8]. In mesh process, the beam is divided into some
finite beam elements of length l. Each element is modeled with 3D
beams elements having 2 nodes and 14 dof. Linear shape functions
ð42aÞ are assumed for axial displacements u and cubic functions for the
other displacements (i.e. v ; w and h are used. The vectors {q} and
fqg ¼ ½NðnÞfr ge and f/g ¼ ½GðnÞfr ge ð45a; bÞ

b 1Þ ¼ w;xx ; b 2Þ ¼ v ;xx ; b 1Þ ¼ v ;xx ; b 2Þ ¼ w;xx where [N(n)] is the shape functions matrix and [G(n)] is a matrix
Að2; Að2; Að3; Að3;
which links the gradient vector {/} to the nodal displacements.
In second stage, a relationship between fdag and {d/} is found: These matrices are function on local coordinate n. In the framework
of finite element method, the equilibrium equations and the mate-
fdag ¼ ½PðaÞfd/g ð42bÞ rial behavior are then written as:
8[ R1 [ R1
The matrix [P(a)] includes large torsion functions. Finally, by < 2l 1 fdr gte ½Bð/; at fSgdn  k 2l 1 fdr gte ff ge dn ¼ 0
injecting (42b) into (42a), the last term in the right hand side of e

e
 8fdr g
h i :
(41) can be written in terms of {d/} and a new matrix Að/;~ aÞ is fSg ¼ ½D ½Bl  þ 12 ½Bnl ð/Þ  ½Bnla ðaÞ fr ge
introduced as: ð46a; bÞ
h i h i S
b b e denotes the assembling process over basic elements. The
½Aa ðdaÞf/g ¼ Að/Þ fdag ¼ Að/Þ ½PðaÞfd/g matrices and vectors used in the formulation (46) are listed below:
h i h i
~
¼ Að/; aÞ fd/g ð42cÞ ~nl ð/; aÞ
½Bð/; aÞ ¼ ½Bl  þ ½Bnl ð/Þ  ½Bnla ðaÞ  B ð46cÞ
h i
~ are:
The non vanished terms of matrix A where
½Bl ¼ ½H½GðnÞ; ½Bnl ð/Þ ¼ ½Að/Þ½GðnÞ ð46d-eÞ
~
Að2:8Þ ~
¼ ðw;xx s þ v ;xx ðc þ 1ÞÞ Að3:8Þ ¼ v ;xx s þ w;xx ðc þ 1Þ
h i h i
½Bnla ðaÞ ¼ ½Aa ðaÞ½GðnÞ; B ~
~ nl ð/; aÞ ¼ Að/; aÞ ½GðnÞ ð46f-gÞ
The previous relationship (42c) permits us to write the vector {dc}
in (41) in terms of {d/} only, as:
 h i and
~
fdcg ¼ ½H þ ½Að/Þ  ½Aa ðaÞ  Að/; aÞ fd/g ð43Þ ff ge ¼ ½NðnÞt fF e g þ ½GðnÞt fM e g ð46hÞ

Based on formulas (40) for {c} and (43) for {dc}, the matrix formu- Matrices [Bl ] and [Bnl (/)] are familiar in non-linear structural anal-
lation of the equilibrium system (35) and the material behavior (37) ysis. In addition, one can remark the presence of new matrices
h i
are arranged into the following system: [Bnla (a)] and B ~ nl ð/; aÞ . These new matrices result from large tor-
8R  h it sion assumptions and flexural–torsional coupling. They are function
> t ~
< L fd/g ½H þ ½Að/Þ  ½Aa ðaÞ  Að/; aÞ fSgdx
> on the introduced trigonometric functions c and s and flexural–
R    ð44a; bÞ
>
> k L fdqgt fF g þ fd/gt fMg dx ¼ 0 torsional coupling. The last vector ff ge is related to the nodal
:   forces. Before solution, the boundary conditions are introduced in
fSg ¼ ½D ½H þ 12 ½Að/Þ  ½Aa ðaÞ f/g
system (46a). This leads after to a non-linear system with a
By this way, the elastic equilibrium equations of a thin-walled certain unknowns to be found. The solution procedure is described
tapered beam have been derived without any assumptions about below.
the torsion angle amplitude. The tapered constants are present in
the elastic matrix behavior [D]. Due to large torsion amplitude, 4.3. Solution procedure
trigonometric functions c = cosh  1 and s = sinh have been included
as components in vector {a} in the analysis and non-linear and To solve the non-linear problem (46), the classical
highly coupled kinematic relationships have been encountered. incremental-iterative Newton–Raphson procedure is followed.
h i
~ With this aim in view, the tangent stiffness matrix must be com-
New matrices ½Aa ðaÞ and Að/; aÞ depending on trigonometric  
puted. If the unknowns of the system (45) fU gt ; k ¼
functions c and s and flexural–torsional coupling have been then
ð fr g fSg fag ; kÞ are sought in the form:
obtained. Below, a finite element approach is followed for the dis-
cretization and solution procedure of the system (44). fU g ¼ fU 0 g þ fDU g and k ¼ k0 þ Dk ð47a; bÞ
Let us remind that authors [51] have studied the effect of tor-
Given an initial guess of the solution ({U 0 }, k0 Þ, the increments of
sion approximation on the behavior of thin-walled beams and
the problem ({DU}, Dk) fulfill the following conditions:
obtain impressive difference in post-buckling behavior between
the large torsion model and other models where the trigonometric [l Z 1 
½Bð/0 ; a0 Þt fDSg þ ½DBð/; aÞt fS0 g dn  Dkff g ¼ f0g
functions c and s are approximated by polynomial functions. This is 2 1
e
the reason why in the following section the finite element
ð48aÞ
approach of the model is carried out in large torsion context.
138 F. Mohri et al. / Engineering Structures 99 (2015) 132–148

 
1 able to study the non-linear behavior, the stability and
fDSg ¼ ½D ½Bl  þ ½Bnl ð/0 Þ  ½Bnla ða0 Þ fDr g
2 post-buckling analyses of beams with variable cross sections.
 
1
þ ½D ½Bnl ðD/Þ  ½Bnla ðDaÞ fr 0 g ð48bÞ
2 5. Applications and validation examples

Due to highly non-linear and coupling terms involved in matrix

A finite element approach based on 3D beam element including
[B(/; a)], the increments [DB(/; a)] in (48a) and [Bnla (Da)] in (48a)
large torsion, warping, flexural–torsional coupling and tapering
are not straightforward and must be computed with more caution.
has been investigated previously. Due to highly coupled and
After needed transformations, one gets for the geometric stiffness
non-linear equilibrium equations, iterative methods are adopted
matrix the following expression:
in the solution. The obtained tangent matrix accounts for large dis-
½Bð/0 ; a0 Þt fDSg ¼ ½Bð/0 ; a0 Þt ½D½Bð/0 ; a0 ÞfDr g ð48cÞ placements, initial stresses, large torsion and flexural–torsional
coupling. This element referenced B3Dwt is incorporated into a
The second step concerns the formulation of the initial stress non-linear finite element package. Some examples are presented
matrix. This matrix is obtained from the transformation of the sec- hereafter. Based on some benchmark solutions, some comparisons
ond term ½DBð/; aÞt fS 0 g present in (48a). One arrives to examples are studied. The validation is followed by investigation of
linear and non-linear stability of struts and beams with variable
½DBð/; aÞt fS0 g
h i h i h it
 cross section in buckling and lateral buckling. At the end, the per-
¼ ½Gt S0  S0 ½Pða0 Þ  ½Pða0 Þt S0  S0 ð/0 ; a0 Þ ½GfDr g formance of the proposed element is outlined by comparison of
post-buckling behavior of some tapered beams with shell elements
ð48dÞ available in a commercial code. The ability of the element to
i h capture accurate bifurcations and the equilibrium path far to
The matrix [P(a0 )] has been used in (41b). By defining: S0 ða0 Þ ¼ bifurcation points in presence of large torsion is demonstrated.
h i When the equilibrium curves present singular points, the
S0 ½Pða0 Þ, one writes:
Newton–Raphson iterative procedure based on arc length method
½DBðh; aÞt fS0 g is adopted.
h i h i h it

¼ ½Gt S0  S0 ða0 Þ  S0 ða0 Þ  S0 ðh0 ; a0 Þ ½GfDr g ð48eÞ 5.1. Newly tapered cross section constants

Or: In the present work, the system (38) is adopted. This means that
the coordinate y, z and x are uncoupled and that the referential is
½DBðh; aÞt fS0 g ¼ ½Gt ½S0 ðh0 ; a0 Þ½GfDrg ð48fÞ chosen with origin in cross section centroid and coordinate axes y
The [S0 (h0 a0 )] matrix in (48f) includes all the initial stress matrices: and z are principal bending axes. Most of terms and constants
h i h i h it
 (excluded the tapering terms) are defined in Mohri [8]. The addi-
½S0 ðh0 ; a0  ¼ S0  S0 ða0 Þ  S0 ða0 Þ  S0 ðh0 ; a0 Þ ð49aÞ tional tapering terms (t zz0 ; t yy0 ; t Xx t y0 y0 ; t z0 z0 ; t XX Þ can be easily com-
puted as followed in Mohri [52]. One gets:
The non vanished terms of these matrices are the following. R b2;x R
ty0 y0 ¼ A
y2;x dA ¼ 6
yy;x dA ¼ bb6;x Af
Af t yy0 ¼ A
S0 ð2; 2Þ ¼ N0 ; S0 ð3; 3Þ ¼ N0 ; S0 ð4; 4Þ ¼ M r0 ð49bÞ R R
h2;x
t z0 z0 ¼ A z2;x dA ¼ 12 ðAw þ 6Af Þ tzz0 ¼ A zz;x dA ¼ hh 12
;x
ðAw þ 6Af Þ
R 2 ðbh;x Þ2 R b2 hh;x
Sð5; 8Þ ¼ M z0 s  My0 ðc þ 1Þ; Sð6; 8Þ tXX ¼ A X dA ¼ 6 Af ; t Xx ¼ A XxdA ¼ 12 Af ;
¼ M y0 s  Mz0 ðc þ 1Þ ð49cÞ ð53Þ
In (53), Af and Aw denote to flange and web areas and t yy0 ; t y0 y0 ; t zz0 ; tz0 z0
S0 ð8; 8Þ ¼ My0 ðv ;xx s  w;xx ðc þ 1ÞÞ  M z0 ðw;xx s þ v ;xx ðc þ 1ÞÞ ð49dÞ are new tapering constants in bending developed in the present
model. The other tapering constants tXx ; and tXX are related to tor-
Finally, the global matrix form of the incremental problem (48a) can
sion. One can easily check that these constant are the same as those
be written as
obtained in Kitipornchai [34], Yau [41], Yang [50].
½K t fDr g  Dkff g ¼ f0g ð50Þ
5.2. Linear equilibrium equations
The tangent stiffness matrix [K t ] is given by
½K t  ¼ ½K g  þ ½ðK s0  ð51Þ It is important to assess the effect of the newly tapering coeffi-
cients derived here on the behavior and stability of tapered beams.
with:
For the purpose, let us derive the equilibrium equation according
Z

[l 1
to a linearized version of the present model. The equilibrium equa-
Kg ¼ ½Bðh0 ; a0 Þt ½D½Bðh0 ; a0 Þdn; ð52aÞ tions are obtained from the stationary conditions of the total
e
2 1
[l Z 1 potential energy carried out in Eqs. 29 and 32 from the strain
½K S0  ¼ ½Gt ½Sðh0 ; a0 Þ½Gdn ð52bÞ energy and the external load variations dU and dW. For clarity, they
e
2 1 are reminded below:
Z
[K g ] is the geometric stiffness matrix and [K S0 ] is the initial stress 
dU ¼ Nde0  My dky  M z dkz þ Msv dh;x
stiffness matrix. L
By this way, a large torsion non-linear finite element model for 
1
elastic thin-walled beams with tapered cross sections has been þBx dh;xx þ M r dðh;x Þ2  Ny0 dv ;x  Nz0 dw;x  MX dh;x dx ð54aÞ
2
investigated. The calculation of the tangent stiffness matrix was
possible thanks to the introduction of new trigonometric variables When loads are reduced to 3D distributed loads (qx ; qy ; qz Þ and a
(c = cosh  1) and (s = sinh) are present in {a} vector. The model is torsion moment mx :

Z
dW ¼ ðqx du þ qy dv þ qz dw þ mx dhx Þdx
With e0 is the membrane component (e0 ¼ u;x þ 12 ðv 2;x þ w2;x Þ). For a
linearized version of the equilibrium, the following relationships
are adopted for the virtual strain variations terms of (54a):
de0 ¼ du;x þ v ;x dv ;x þ w;x dw;x dky ¼ dw;xx
2
¼ dv ;xx dðh;x Þ ¼ h;x dh;x
After some part integrations, the equilibrium equations are
arranged with respect to the virtual displacement components
du; dv ; dw and dh. One gets:
N;x ¼ qx
ðMz Þ;xx þ ðNy0 Þ;x  ðNv ;x Þ;x ¼ qy
ðMy Þ;xx þ ðNz0 Þ;x  ðNw;x Þ;x ¼ qz
ðBx Þ;xx  ðM sv Þ;x  ðM X Þ;x  ðMr h;x Þ;x ¼ mx
In the case of doubly symmetric tapered beam, the linearized stress
components of the cross section forces are obtained from the rela-
tionship (38). One gets:
N ¼ EAu;x M y ¼ EIy w;xx  Etzz0 w;x M z ¼ EIz v ;xx  Et yy0 v ;x
M sv ¼ GIt h;x Bx ¼ EIx h;xx þ EtXx0 h;x M r ¼ NI0
Ny0 ¼ Et y0 y0 v ;x  Etyy0 v ;xx Nz0 ¼ Etz0 z0 w;x  Etzz0 w;xx
M X ¼ Et XX h;x þ EtXx h;xx
In presence of bending forces and a torsion moment (no axial force),
the equilibrium behavior equations are:
ðEIz v ;xx  Etyy0 v ;x Þ þ ðEt y0 y0 v ;x  Etyy0 v ;xx Þ ¼ qy
;xx ;x
ðEIy w;xx  Et w;x Þ
zz0 þ ðEtz0 z0 w;x  Etzz0 w;xx Þ ¼ qz
;xx ;x
ðEIx h;xx þ Et Xx h;x Þ  ðGIt h;x Þ;x  ðEt XX h;x þ EtXx h;xx Þ ¼ mx
;xx
In the present study, the outlined tapering terms are present in all
the equilibrium equation. One remark, that these equations are fully
uncoupled. They can be solved separately. Moreover, one can check
that the last torsion equation is similar to that of Kitipornchai [34]
and Ronagh [37] who applied a concentrated torsion moment at the
tip end. However, in presence only of an axial compressive force P,
the buckling equilibrium equations derived from (55) with the help
of (56) are listed below:
N ¼ P
ðEIz v ;xx  Etyy0 v ;x Þ þ ðEty0 y0 v ;x  Etyy0 v ;xx Þ  ðNv ;x Þ;x ¼ 0
;xx ;x
ðEIy w;xx  Etzz0 w;x Þ;xx þ ðEtz0 z0 w;x  Et zz0 w;xx Þ;x  ðNw;x Þ;x ¼ 0
ðEIx h;xx þ Et Xx h;x Þ  ðGIt h;x Þ;x  ðEtXX h;x þ EtXx h;xx Þ  ðNI0 h;x Þ;x ¼ 0
;xx
Again, in most of papers published on tapered beams, the tapering
is present only in the torsion Eq. (58d). It is known that for such
beams, the buckling modes are fully uncoupled. This means that
the torsion tapering term has no incidence on bending modes. In
the present model, tapering coefficients are present in all equations.
Bending and torsion buckling modes can be captured. In presence of
non constant stiffness terms, solutions of the behavior equilibrium
Eqs. (57) and the stability system (58) analytically are very cumber-
some. Recourse to semi-analytical methods combining analytical
and numerical formulations as Rayleigh–Ritz procedure, Galerkin’s
method, or other alternative methods are always adopted. In buck-
ling stability analyses, buckling loads are performed according to
the assumption of mode displacements for the system (58). These
modes are then dependent on the boundary conditions. In our case,
the effects of the newly terms on behavior and stability in presence
F. Mohri et al. / Engineering Structures 99 (2015) 132–148 139
of axial and bending forces will be studied hereafter by the finite
ð54bÞ
element approach. At a last comment, let us remind that the equi-
librium equations of a prismatic beam can be easily deduced from
(57) and (58) by omitting the tapered coefficients. The classical
behavior or buckling stability equations are then evident.
dkz 5.3. Torsion behavior buckling behavior
ð54cÞ Example 1: Torsion behavior of a tapered beam
Effect of tapering coefficient on the torsion behavior of an alu-
minum cantilever tapered beam under a twist moment M x applied
at the tip end D has been studied by Kitipornchai both theoritically
and experimentally [34]. In the study, effect of tapering coefficient
a on the torsion stiffness at the tip end M x /hD has been investi-
gated. The material and geometric data used in the analysis are
ð55Þ enclosed in Fig. 3a. In the study, the origin of the beam is fully
clamped and the warping is restrained at this point. This example
has been studied by Ronagh [38]. In the mesh, four beam elements
have been used as in Ronagh [38]. The present beam has been also
modeled with 3D prismatic beams invetigated in Mohri [8]. For
each tapering coefficient a, the beam is subdived to 4 elements
with uniform cross sections and the cross sections caracterisitcs
of the elements are computed at theei midlength (Fig. 3b).
The variation of the twist stiffness of the tip end in terms of the
ð56Þ
coefficient a re reported in Fig. 4. One can observe that the twist
sitffness is non-linearly dependant on the tapering term a. The
stiffness depicts a minimum near a = 0.4. The agreement of the
present model (B3Dwt) with the closed form solution derived in
Kitipornchai [34] is good. When the tapered beam is subdivided
into equivlent prismatic elements, one can remark that the twist
stiffness is linearly dependant on a and modeling tapering beams
with prismatic elements is no longer valid in presence of small
tapering coefficients (here a <0.7).
;x
The torsion stiffness rate along the beam has been studied is
ð57a-cÞ some other reference points A, B and C along the beam
(Fig. 3a). The curves M x =hCA and M x =hCB , where (hCA ¼ hC  hA ,
hCB ¼ hC  hB ) are depicted in Fig. 5. Test results carried out on four
tapered beams in Kitipornchai [34] are reported. Good agreement
of B3Dwt element with Kitipornchai tests is remarked. When the
tapered beam is modeled with prismatic beams, the model is
acceptable for tapering coefficient a near 1. It is confirmed that
prismatic beams are not able to capture the true behavior of
tapered beams in presence of high tapering coefficients. Since the
present study concerns the pure torsion behavior, the newly terms
developed in this paper have no incidence. All the results are in
agreement. Similar results are available in Chan [26] in presence
of stability behavior. Zhang [18] mentioned that similar treatments
are also adopted in the commercial FE software ANSYS on its
tapered beam elements, implying that the lateral buckling load
;x
of tapered beams using tapered elements of ANSYS is not reliable.
ð58a-dÞ
Example 2: Buckling behavior of a tapered column with
flange tapering
In this example, the buckling stability of a tapered cantilever
strut is studied. The beam has a doubly I cross section with linear
flanges tapering (Fig. 6). At support, the flanges width is b. It
decreases linearly from the support to the free end with a tapering
ratio b. The column considered has a length L = 1524 mm. The
cross-sectional dimensions and properties are the same as in the
previous example, but they are reminded for clarity. The buckling
loads of the beam have been computed for different tapering coef-
ficients b varied from 0.1 to 1. Ten elements have been used in the
mesh process. It is observed that for all the values of b, the buckling
mode is in bending about the z axis. This means, that in the equi-
librium, only the Eq. (58b) operates with the classical geometric
constants (EIz Þ and the newly tapering constants (Etyy0 , Ety0 y0 Þ. The
torsion tapering constants (EtXx ; t XX Þ have no incidence. The
140 F. Mohri et al. / Engineering Structures 99 (2015) 132–148

Fig. 3. Tapered cantilever beam under tip twist moment. (a): geometry and material data (b): view of the tapered beam modeled with prismatic beams.

45
βb P
Mx/θ D(Nm/rad)

P
z
40 Kipornchai [34] tf
Present B3Dwt
tw h=75.87, b=31.55,
y h t =3.11, t =2.13mm
f w
L=1524mm
35
b
Prismac beams
x x E= 65310, G=25630 MPa

α z y 0.1 ≤ β ≤ 1
30
- 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0
h b
Fig. 4. Effect of web tapering cofficient on tip twist stiffness. Comparisons of B3Dwt
element to benchmark solution and equivalent FE prismatic beam element. Fig. 6. Buckling of a cantilever beam with tapered flanges, geometry and material
data.

140
Present (B3Dwt)
Mx/θCB
without the tapering constants, specific numerical method must
Mx/θ Tests [34] be probably adopted in order to capture the true buckling loads
120 of the tapered beam. Moreover, the beam buckling mode is not
constant and depends on b. The representative modes are depicted
100
together on Fig. 7b, respectively b = 1, 0.5 and 0.2. The stiffer mode
Prismac beams
is obtained when b = 0.2. This example has been studied in Ronagh
[38] and Yang [50] but the numerical method is not detailed. Good
80 Present (B3Dwt) agreement is observed.
Mx /θCA
Tests [34]

α
60 5.4. Lateral buckling and post buckling behavior
- 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0

Fig. 5. Effect of web tapering coefficient on twist rates hCB and hCA . Comparison of
B3Dwt with tests.
variation of the buckling loads in terms of b are computed by con-
sidering the newly constants of the present model and by neglect-
ing them. The results are depicted in Fig. 7a. With the present
model, the buckling load decreases non-linearly from the classical
buckling load when b = 1 to a minimum value when b = 0.1. When
b = 1, the case of classical prismatic cantilever beam is obtained
2
(Here, Pz ¼ p4LEI2 z ¼ 1:135 kN). When the tapering coefficients are
omitted, the buckling load is independent to b. This means that
The following examples are performed with the objective to
evaluate the efficiency of B3Dwt for capturing the lateral buckling
loads and lateral post-buckling resistance of beams initially in
bending. For each load case, solutions of the present model are
compared to (1) analytical solutions when they are possible, (2)
to available solutions in literature and to finite element simula-
tions on Abaqus [53]. In this code, the beam walls are modeled
with thin-walled shell elements (S8R). For the purpose, uniform
mesh has been assumed for web and flanges. In what follows,
the numerical buckling loads resulting from solutions of the eigen-
value problem and the non-linear bifurcations observed along the
equilibrium paths are computed and compared. Authors have
 F. Mohri et al. / Engineering Structures 99 (2015) 132–148 141

Without (Ety’y and Ety’y’) 1.0

1.2
v(β)/v(β=1)
β=1
1.0 Pz (kN) 0.8
β=0.5
0.8
0.6
β=0.2
0.6
Present (B3Dwt)
0.4
0.4

0.2
0.2
β
0.0
x/L
-
0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1
(a) (b)
Fig. 7. Effect of flange tapering cofficient on cantilever buckling: (a) effect on buckling load, (b) effect on buckling modes.

extensively studied the beam lateral buckling phenomena and ana- section dimensions and the material data of the prismatic beam are
lytical solutions have been derived according to linear and reported in Fig. 8. For the tapered beam, a coefficient a ¼ 0:5 is
non-linear stability solutions [17]. In what follows, the case of can- considered. In the present study, the beam lengths have been var-
tilever beams under tip concentrated load is considered. For prismatic ied from 3 to 8 m. The different solutions are summarized in
beam, the non-linear buckling according to non-linear stability anal- Table 1. For the prismatic beam, the present results are arranged
ysis takes into account for bending stiffness ratio (I z =I y Þ by: in column 1. 30 beam elements are adopted in mesh. They are fol-
2sffiffiffiffiffi0 sffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi13 lowed by Andrade results [40] where buckling loads have been car-
P z 4 Ix @ GJL2 A5 ried out for L = 4, 6 and 8 m. The linear and non-linear stability
M cr ¼ Q cr L ¼ 1:12 pffiffiffi 1 þ 1:22 ð59Þ analytical solutions (Stab,lin and Stab,nl) are reported in column
k Iz p2 EIx
3 and 4 according to relationship (59). Finite elements results using
3D shell elements S8R of Abaqus [53] are reported at the end.
2
With Pz ¼ p LEI
2
z
k ¼ 1  IIyz . For linear stability solutions, one puts These results are obtained from solutions of eigenvalue problem
k = 1. (EVP). For the tapered beam, B3Dwt results are reported with shell
Example 3: Linear and non-linear stability of prismatic and elements and other results obtained with 1D elements in Andrade
tapered beams [40] and Papp [54] and Bijlaard [55]. One remark that in presence
Andrade [40] have studied the influence of the pre-buckling of short lengths (L = 3, 4 m), the difference between 1D models and
deflections on the buckling loads of prismatic and web tapered results of 3D shell elements is important. It has been checked that
cantilevers loaded by a concentrated load at the tip point. The cross in such situations, the beam is prone to local and distorsional

Fig. 8. Lateral buckling stability of prismatic and tapered cantilever beams: cross section dimensions and material data.

Table 1
Variation of the lateral buckling loads for the prismatic and the tapered beam with length L according to different models with relative errors ( ) in %. In bold, the reference
columns. (–: not studied).

Prismatic beam, Q cr (kN) Tapered beam(a ¼ 0:5Þ; Q cr (kN)

L(m) B3Dwt Andrade[40] Stab.lin Stab.nl Shell (EVP) B3Dwt Andrade [40] Papp [54] Bijlaard Shell
[55] (EVP)
3 127.99 – 117.06 121.78 74.77 114.41 – – 94.67
(+5.10%) (3.88%) (38.60%) (+20.85%)
4 61.03 (+4.80%) 61 (+4.74%) 55.98 (3.88%) 58.24 45.99 55.33 (+7.83%) 61.2 55.7 53.5 51.31
(21.03%) (+19.27%) (+8.55%)
5 34.13 (+2.39%) – 32.04 (3.88%) 33.33 29.36 31.49 (+3.99%) – – 30.28
(11.91%)
6 22.00 (+3.17%) 22.1 20.50 (3.88%) 21.32 19.63 (7.94%) 19.70 (+0.94%) 22.1 20.2 20.3 19.52
(+3.65%) (+13.23%) (+3.49%)
7 15.01 (+2.07%) – 14.14 (3.88%) 14.71 13.78 (6.31%) 13.50 (+0.11%) – – 13.48
8 10.99 (+2.65%) 11 (+2.70%) 10.30 (3.88%) 10.71 10.10 (5.68%) 9.61 (2.08%) 11 (+12.06%) 10.1 10.2 9.82
(+2.89%)
142 F. Mohri et al. / Engineering Structures 99 (2015) 132–148
buckling modes and this phenomena is neglected in 1D models. In
prismatic beam, results of the present model are in accordance
with non-linear stability solutions and Andrade. Linear stability
solutions errors are constant due to ratio k1 in (59). In tapered
beam, they are in agreement with Papp [54] and Bijlaard [55].
Linear stability solution and EVP are slightly small than B3Dwt pre-
diction, but the difference is not important. This study confirms
then that these cross sections are not very sensitive to
pre-buckling deflection effects. The errors of the different models
with respect to a reference column are added between brackets.
For the prismatic beam the non-linear closed form solutions
(stab.nl) are reference. For the tapered beam, shell results are taken
as reference. Reference columns are in bold.
Example 4: Post-buckling behavior of tapered cantilever
beams
In the present session, the ability of the beam finite element
model to capture the non-linear behavior of beams in presence
of bifurcation is investigated. For this aim, the equilibrium curves
of the beam are drown in pre buckling and post-buckling states
and compared to equivalent results coming from Abaqus. In order
to assess the pre-buckling deflection effects on beam lateral buck-
ling behavior, two European steel cross sections are considered in
the study in the case of cantilever boundary conditions. The first
with short flanges is obtained from the IPE300, the second with
large flanges results from HEA200. The data and tapering coeffi-
cients are reported in Fig. 9. In order to capture the
post-buckling behavior of the beam some initial imperfections
are added in the lateral direction yy (F y0 Þ and additional torsion
moment (M x0 Þ. These values are chosen as small as possible in
order to obtain perfect bifurcation on the equilibrium curves and
to permit to go on the post-buckling equilibrium state. Based on
some initial tests, the optimal values are obtained. Moreover, the
equilibrium curves of the finite element tapered beam without
the newly terms are added for comparison.
The post-buckling equilibrium curves of the tapered beam with
short flanges (beam 1) are reported in Fig. 10a–d. The variations of
displacements (u; v and wÞ at the tip end in function of the applied
load are given. These equilibrium curves have been performed with
Abaqus shell elements (S8R) and the present finite element beam
model considering the newly tapering terms (B3Dwt) and similar
beam element where the newly tapering terms are omitted. The
axial displacement variation with load is depicted in Fig. 10a.
This displacement is very small in the pre-buckling state. When
the buckling load is reached, this displacement increases
non-linearly in the post-buckling range. The post-buckling equilib-
rium curves of B3Dwt beam element and shell results are very
close far from buckling (until 0.7 m). The equilibrium curve of
the beam when the new tapering terms are omitted is stiffer in
the post-buckling range (Fig. 10a). The lateral displacement
(Q z ; v Þ follows in Fig. 10b. This displacement is present only in
the post-buckling range. Near lateral buckling area, the beam
equilibrium curves are close to shell prediction. When the lateral
displacement (v Þ becomes larger (more than 0.5 m), the disperen-
cies between the beam element without the new tapering terms
and shell element increase. The post-buckling equilibrium curves
Fig. 9. Lateral post-buckling behavior of tapered beams, cross section dimensions and material data of the studied beams.
of B3Dwt beam element and shell results remain close far from
buckling (until 0.8 m). The deflection load variation is depicted in
Fig. 10c. This curve is linear in the pre-buckling state and increases
continuously in the post-buckling state. One can observe that the
B3Dwt and shell element are in good agreement far from the lat-
eral buckling load (until 2 m). When the new tapering terms are
omitted, the curve is stiffer in both pre-buckling and
post-buckling states. According to this curve, it is important to
compare the beam behavior in the pre-buckling range and lateral
buckling loads predictions of the different models. For the purpose,
a zoom view of curve in the pre-buckling area is drawn in Fig. 10d.
The buckling loads and relative deflections as reported for compar-
ison. From this curve, the different results are then summarized in
Table 2. Taking the shell element results as reference, the beam
stiffness (Q =wÞ according B3Dwt is equal to 155.10 kN/m. This
value is close to the shell stiffness (150.46 kN/m). The relative error
is near 3%. When the new tapering terms are omitted, the beam
behavior is more rigid. Its stiffness is very high and reaches
257.76 kN/m. The relative error to the shell element is more 71%.
The lateral buckling loads are respectively 23.54 kN with shell ele-
ment, 22.49 kN with B3Dwt element (4.46% error) and 25.42 kN
when the new tapering terms are omitted (8% error). The ability
of the present element with the new tapering terms in bending
behavior is excellent. The lateral buckling load and the
post-buckling equilibrium curves are close to shell predictions. It
is important to remind that with the present beam finite elements
(with and without the new tapering terms), the beam is modeled
with 40 elements and 41 nodes, (280 dof). With Abaqus, 2847
nodes, 902 S8R shell elements with a total of 17,082 dof have been
necessary. Important time economy is then obtained with the pre-
sent model without loss of accuracy compared to full models using
shell elements. Some deformed shapes of the beam for some repre-
sentatives load intensities are depicted in Fig. 11.
The post-buckling equilibrium curves of the tapered beam with
large flanges (Beam 2) are reported in Fig. 12a–d. We report the
variation of displacements u; v ; w at the tip end in function of the
applied load. These equilibrium curves have been performed with
the present model (B3Dwt) and Abaqus shell elements (S8R).
Similar equilibrium curves of the beam without the newly terms
are added for comparison. In the analysis, the applied load has
been varied from zero until a value higher than the lateral buckling
load. For this, some illustrative images of the beam behavior in the
loading process are illustrated in Fig. 13. The behavior of this
tapered beam is very different than the previous beam for many
reasons:
– The behavior of the beam in the axial direction (curve (Q z ; uÞ
is highly non-linear (Fig. 12a). For this beam, the displacement
is present in pre-buckling state and in post-buckling range. It is
observed that the B3Dwt and shell element curves are close but
the curve of the beam element without the new tapering terms
is more rigid in both the pre and post-buckling states. With
shell element, the behavior in the post-buckling state is possi-
ble until load Q z ¼ 72:6 kN. At this load level the execution is
aborted due to local buckling at the clamped end (Fig. 13e).
 F. Mohri et al. / Engineering Structures 99 (2015) 132–148 143

Present (B3Dwt)
100 100
Without the new terms
Qz(kN) Qz(kN) Shell (S8R)
80 80
Shell (S8R) Qz
Present (B3Dwt) Qz Without the
60 v new terms
60

Qz 40
40
u
20
20
v(m)
u(m) 0
0 0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0
-0.70 -0.50 -0.30 -0.10
(b) lateral displacement v
(a) axial displacement u

Present (B3Dwt)
100 30
Without the Qz(kN)
Qz(kN) new terms 25.42
25
80 23.54
22.49
20
60 Shell (S8R)
15
40 Qz
Qz 10

20
5
w 0.156
w(m) 0.097 0.145 w(m)
0 0
0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 0.00 0.05 0.10 0.15 0.20

(c) deflecon graph w (d) Zoom view of the deflecons curves in the pre-

buckling range
Fig. 10. Tapered beam 1: Load displacements variation in pre and post-buckling states. (Abaqus 3D shell elements compared to B3Dwt with and without the new tapering
terms).

Table 2
Deflection-load slopes (stiffness) for the tapered beam 1 and 2 in the pre-buckling state and relative errors () in % to shell results (in bold).

Tapered beam 1 Tapered beam 2

w (m) Q (kN) k (kN/m) w (m) Q (kN) k (kN/m)
Shell (S8R) 0.156 23.54 150.46 0.648 50.35 77.70
B3Dwt 0.145 22.49 (4.46%) 155.10 (+3.09%) 0.630 47.97 (4.73%) 76.14 (2.00%)
Without the new tapering terms 0.097 25.42 (+7.99%) 257.76 (+71.31%) 0.317 40.98 (18.61%) 129.27 (+66.37%)

– The lateral displacement v is present only in the post-buckling
state (Fig. 12b). Again, it is confirmed again that the (Q z ; v Þ
curve of present element B3Dwt which incorporates new
tapering terms is close than the shell element. When the new
tapering terms are omitted, the (Q z ; v Þ curve is lower than the
shell curve. The difference becomes more important far from
buckling.
The deflection load variation is depicted in Fig. 12c. This curve is
linear in the pre-buckling state and increases continuously in the
post-buckling state, with a slope change observed at the lateral
buckling, dependant on the finite element model. One observes
that the B3Dwt and shell element are in good agreement in the
pre-buckling and post-buckling range until the shell program fails
due to local buckling at point (Q z ; wÞ = (72.57 kN, 1.10 m). When
the new tapering terms are omitted, the curve is more stiffer in
both pre-buckling and post-buckling states.
According to the load deflection (Q z ; wÞ curve, it is important to
compare the beam behavior in the pre-buckling range and lateral
buckling loads predictions of the different models. A zoom view
of the curve in the pre-buckling area is drawn in Fig. 12d. The buck-
ling loads and relative deflections are clearly reported for compar-
ison. From this curve, the different results are then summarized in
Table 2. Taking the shell element results as reference, the beam
stiffness (Q =wÞ according B3Dwt is equal to 76.14 kN/m. This value
is close to the shell stiffness (77.70 kN/m). The relative error is near
2%. When the new tapering terms are omitted, the beam behavior
is more rigid. Its stiffness is very high and reaches the value
129.27 kN/m. The relative error to the shell element is more than
66%. The lateral buckling loads are also reported in Fig. 12d and
144 F. Mohri et al. / Engineering Structures 99 (2015) 132–148

Fig. 11. Tapered beam 1: Some views of the beam deformation during loading.

150 150 Present (B3Dwt)

Without the Qz(kN) Qz(kN)
125 125
new terms Without the
100 100 new terms
Present (B3Dwt)
75 75
Qz Shell (S8R) Qz
50 50
u Shell (S8R) v
25 25
u(m)
v(m)
0 0
-0.50 -0.40 -0.30 -0.20 -0.10 - - 0.10 0.20 0.30 0.40 0.50 0.60 0.70
(a) Axial displacement at p end
(b) Lateral displacement behavior at p end

150 60
Qz(kN)
125 50 50.35
Without the 47.97
100 40 40.98
new terms
Shell (S8R)
75 Present (B3Dwt) 30

50 20 Qcr=31.54(EVP)
Qz
25 Qcr=31.54(EVP) 10 0.630 0.648
w w(m) 0.317
0 0
- 0.25 0.50 0.75 1.00 1.25 1.50 - 0.20 0.40 0.60 0.80 1.00

(c) Deflecon behavior at p end (d) Zoom view of the deflecons curves in the pre-
buckling range

Fig. 12. Tapered beam 2: Load displacements variation in pre and post-buckling states. (Abaqus 3D shell elements compared to B3Dwt with and without the new tapering
terms)

Table 2. They are respectively 50.35 kN for to the shell element,
near 48 kN with B3Dwt element (4.73% error) and averages
41 kN when the new tapering terms are omitted (18.61% error).
It is confirmed again the efficiency and the accuracy of the present
with the new tapering terms with regard to the beam element
neglecting these terms. The load deflection curve is in good agree-
ment with shell element. The lateral buckling loads are very close.
At the end, it is important to remind that if the lateral buckling
loads of this beam are performed from solutions of the classical lin-
ear eigenvalue problem, one gets with shell elements a value
Q z ¼ 31:54 kN. This value is very low than the true lateral buckling
load obtained on the non-linear equilibrium curves discussed pre-
viously. With reference to the non-linear shell buckling load, the
error is more than 37%. If the classical linear tapered beam models
 F. Mohri et al. / Engineering Structures 99 (2015) 132–148 145

Fig. 13. Tapered beam 2: some views of the beam deformation during loading: (a) beam in pre-buckling state (Q = 25.18 kN), (b) beam near the lateral buckling load
(Q = 51 kN), (c) beam in the post-buckling range (Q = 58.28 kN), (d) beam at the end of loading (Q = 72.57 kN), (e) simulations stops due to flange local buckling.

existing in literature are applied to this tapered beam, the buckling
load should be near the solution of eigenvalue problem
(Q z ¼ 31 kN). They should be not relevant in this case. The behav-
ior of this beam (with large flanges) is predominated by the
pre-buckling deflection effects and lateral buckling load computed
from classical linear stability or solutions of the eigenvalue prob-
lem fail to predict the true lateral buckling load. A detailed study
on the subject can be found in Mohri [56].
6. Conclusions
A non-linear model has been investigated for large torsion
behavior of thin-walled tapered beams with open cross sections.
Green’s strain components are derived according to an original
kinematics that takes account for large torsion, warping, flexu-
ral–torsional coupling and tapering in both bending and torsion.
First, the elastic equilibrium equations and the material behavior
are derived in an arbitrary reference. Two main trial vectors {/}
and {a} that include respectively displacement gradient and large
torsion functions have been used and new tapering stress resul-
tants are present. In a second step, the model has been extended
to finite element representation considering large torsion, flexu-
ral–torsional coupling and tapering effects. A 3D beam with 7
degrees of freedom taking warping into account has been built
(B3Dwt element). For the non-linear behavior, the tangent stiffness
matrix is carried out in terms of large displacements and initial
stresses.
B3Dwt element has been applied to the torsion behavior of
tapered beams. In non-linear behavior with presence of singular
points, the arc-length method is adopted in solution. Benchmark
solutions available in literature have been chosen in the validation
procedure. Good agreement is then observed and it has been
checked that modeling of tapering beams with equivalent pris-
matic finite element is not appropriate in presence of low tapering
coefficient. Many examples have been considered for the buckling,
lateral buckling stability and post-buckling behavior of tapered
beams. The present beam element which incorporates new taper-
ing terms has been compared to shell elements and to similar
beam element without the new tapering terms. Comparisons have
been made in bending behavior and in lateral bucking strength. It
has been confirmed that the present element is close to shell
element in both pre-buckling and post-buckling ranges. The buck-
ling loads are similar and the load deflection curves in pre-buckling
lead to the same stiffness. The similar element without the newly
terms is more stiff. The load deflection stiffness is very high than
shell element and the stiffness is not relevant with errors near
70%. It is proved that pre-buckling deflections are of primary
importance in beam lateral buckling of beams. In has been
146 F. Mohri et al. / Engineering Structures 99 (2015) 132–148
confirmed that in presence of beams with short flanges, EVP solu-
tions are close to bifurcations points. In presence of beams with
large flanges, very sensitive to pre-buckling deflections, the lateral
buckling loads derived from the solutions of the EVP are no longer
valid. The bifurcations loads obtained from B3Dwt are close to
non-linear stability predictions and shell elements. The buckling
load obtained with the beam element without the newly tapering
terms are low than shell element with an error averaging 20%.
In the present paper, applications are made to tapered beams
with doubly-symmetric cross sections. The loads are applied on
beam centrelines. Load eccentricity effects are not considered in
finite element procedure of the present paper. In order to be more
general, the model will be extended to the case of load on the cross
section contour with non-linear tapering. This open topic is in
progress.
Acknowledgement
The first author is grateful for the support of the French State
through the program ‘‘Investment in the future’’ operated by the
National Research Agency (ANR) and referenced by ANR-11-
LABX-0008-01 (LabEx DAMAS).
Appendix A. Proofs of Eq. (1)
This method has been investigated in Mohri [52] in the case of
prismatic open cross section. The same procedure is followed here
in the case of a tapered beam. A straight thin-walled tapered
member with an open section is pictured in Fig. A-1. One considers
a reference point O and a point M on the section contour with its
co-ordinates (y; z; xÞ. Based on the main assumptions used in
thin-walled beams with open cross sections: (1)
unchanged-contour cross section shape and (2) no shear in the
median surface of (no section distortion), the approximation of
the displacements of a point M on the cross section contour can
be derived from those of an arbitrary fixed point O by:
v M ¼ v  z sin h þ yðcos h  1Þ
wM ¼ w þ y sin h þ zðcos h  1Þ
If the relation between local and global coordinates of M is used,
then tangential displacements v t and wt are easily deduced from
Eqs. (A-1) and (A-2):
v t ¼ v cos a þ w sin a  h sin h þ rðcos h  1Þ
wt ¼ v sin a þ w cos a þ r sin h þ hðcos h  1Þ
Fig. A-1. Origin point with global and local axes fixed in point M in the cross section
contour.
In these relationships, a denotes the angle between the y-axis and
the tangent Mt. h and r are the co-ordinates of the center point O
in Mtn:
r ¼ y cos a þ z sin a h ¼ y sin a þ z cos a ðA-4a; bÞ
In an open cross section, the axial displacement uM and the warping
x are obtained from the nullity of the shear deformation in each
profile’s contour. Using this assumption, the Green’s shear deforma-
tion along the contour fulfills the condition:
exs ¼ uM;s þ v t;x þ v t;x v t;s þ wt;x wt;s ¼ 0 ðA-5Þ
From this equation, all the derivatives of v t and wt can be com-
puted, excepted the axial component uM which be determined after
by integration with respect the curvilinear coordinate s. We remind
that in presence of a tapered beam, in addition to the displacment
components which are x dependent, the coordinates y; z; h and r
are so. The terms of Eq. (A-5) are then derived by taking into
account for tapering. On gets:
v t;x ¼ v ;x cos a þ w;x sin a  ðh cos h þ r sin hÞh;x
 h;x sin h þ r ;x ðcos h  1Þ
¼ ðv t;x Þpr þ ðv t;x Þtap ðA-6aÞ
wt;x ¼ v ;x sin a þ w;x sin a þ ðr cos h  h sin hÞh;x
þ r;x sin h þ h;x ðcos h  1Þ
¼ ðwt;x Þpr þ ðwt;x Þtap ðA-6bÞ
In (A-6), the derivatives are split in terms of classical prismatic
terms ðÞpr and the additional tapering terms ðÞtap .
ðv t;x Þpr ¼ v ;x cos a þ w;x sin a  ðh cos h þ r sin hÞ
h;x ðv t;x Þtap ¼ h;x sin h þ r;x ðcos h  1Þ
ðwt;x Þpr ¼ v ;x sin a þ w;x sin a þ ðr cos h  h sin hÞ
h;x ðwt;x Þtap ¼ r ;x sin h þ h;x ðcos h  1Þ
ðA- 1Þ With the condition (h;s ¼ 0 and r ;s ¼ 1), one gets:
ðA-2Þ v t;s ¼ cos h  1 wt;s ¼ sin h ðA-6c; dÞ
According to (A-6), and after some transformations, the known
terms of (A-5) are writing as:
v t;x þ v t;x v t;s þ wt;x wt;s ¼ ðv t;x Þpr cos h þ ðwt;x Þpr sin h
ðA- 3aÞ
þ ðv t;x Þtap cos h þ ðwt;x Þtap sin h ðA-7Þ
ðA-3bÞ
Again, the outlined term is due to tapering contribution. In the case
of prismatic section, the axial displacement uM is obtained by inte-
gration with respect to the coordinate s. Then:
Z  
uM ¼  ðv t;x Þpr cos h þ ðwt;x Þpr sin h ds ðA-8Þ
Taking into account for (A-6a) and (A-6b), one arrives to:
ðv t;x Þpr cos h þ ðwt;x Þpr sin h ¼ ðv ;x cos h þ w;x sin hÞ cos a þ ðw;x cos h
 v ;x sin hÞ sin a  hh;x
By putting this relationship in (A-8) and after integration, one
arrives to the following expression of uM in the case of a prismatic
cross section.
uM ¼ u  yðv ;x cos h þ w;x sin hÞ  zðw;x cos h  v ;x sin hÞ  xh;x
ðA-9Þ
This equation is the same as in Mohri [52]. Eq. (A-9) is obtained
with the help of the following evident geometric relationships
(Fig. A-1)
 F. Mohri et al. / Engineering Structures 99 (2015) 132–148 147

Z
case of thin-walled beams, the components of the strain tensor
dy ¼ ds cos a; dz ¼ ds sin a x ¼  h:ds ðA-10:a-cÞ
s are reduced to the following ones:
In presence of tapered cross sections, the outlined part of (A-7) 1 
must be added. For this aim, according to (A-6) and (A-7) and after exx ¼ uM;x þ ðv M;x Þ2 þ ðwM;x Þ2 ðB6Þ
2
needed calculations, on arrives to:

ðv t;x Þtap cos h þ ðwt;x Þtap sin h 2exy ¼ uM;y þ v M;x þ v M;x v M;y þ wM;x wM;y
2exz ¼ uM;z þ wM;x þ v M;x v M;z þ wM;x wM;z ðB7; 8Þ
¼ ðh;x sin h þ r;x ðcos h  1ÞÞ cos h
þ ðr;x sin h þ h;x ðcos h  1ÞÞ cos h In presence of beams with tapered cross section, one obtains for the
¼ ðh;x sin h þ r;x ðcos h  1ÞÞ ðA-11Þ needed derivatives in (B6)–(B8):
uM;x ¼ u;x  yðkz þ ay h;x Þ  zðky  az h;x Þ  xh;xx  y;x az  z;x ay  x;x h;x
According to (A-4), the x derivatives of h and r are:
v M;x ¼ v ;x  ðzðc þ 1Þ þ ysÞh;x  z;x s þ y;x c
r ;x ¼ y;x cos a þ z;x sin a; h;x ¼ z;x cos a  y;x sin a ðA-12a; bÞ wM;x ¼ w;x þ ðyðc þ 1Þ  zsÞh;x þ y;x s þ z;x c
Taking into account for (A-12), the Eq. (A-11) leads to: ðB9a-cÞ
ðv t;x Þtap cos h þ ðwt;x Þtap sin h ¼ ðz;x sin h þ y;x ðcos h  1ÞÞ cos a
uM;y ¼ az  x;y h;x uM;z ¼ ay  x;z h;x ðB10a; bÞ
þ ðy;x sin h  z;x ðcos h  1ÞÞ sin a
v M;y ¼ c v M;z ¼ s wM;y ¼ s wM;z ¼ c ðB11a; dÞ
Then the contribution of the tapering to the axial term follows as
done in Eq. (A-8) According to (B9a-c), a first expression for the axial strain compo-
Z   nent exx is:
uaM ¼  ðv t;x Þtap cos h þ ðwt;x Þtap sin h ds
exx ¼ u;x  yðkz þ ay h;x Þ  zðky  az h;x Þ  xh;xx  y;x az

¼ y ðz;x sin h þ y;x ðcos h  1Þ  z;x ay  x;x h;x

 z ðy;x sin h  z;x ðcos h  1Þ 1 h  i
þ v ;x  ðzðc þ 1Þ þ ysÞh;x  z;x s þ y;x c 2
¼ ðyy;x þ zz;x Þc þ ðyz;x  zy;x Þs ðA-13Þ 2
1 h 2 i
þ w;x þ ðyðc þ 1Þ  zsÞh;x þ y;x s þ z;x c ðB12aÞ
So, in presence of a tapered cross section, the axial displacement is 2
the addition of the classical prismatic term Eq. (A-9) and the addi-
After development, one gets:
tional term due tapering Eq. (A-13). So:

uM ¼ u  yðv ;x cos h þ w;x sin hÞ  zðw;x cos h  v ;x sin hÞ exx ¼ u;x  yðkz þ ay h;x Þ  zðky  az h;x Þ  xh;xx  y;x az
 xh;x þ uaM ðA-14Þ  z;x ay  x;x h;x
1h 2 i
The proof of Eq. (1) is then complete. Let us remind that in [43], only þ v ;x þ w2;x þ ðy2 þ z2 Þh2;x þ ðy2;x þ z2;x Þðc2 þ s2 Þ
2
web tapering has been considered the additional term uaM takes the
 ½zðc þ 1Þ þ ysv ;x h;x þ ½yðc þ 1Þ  zsw;x h;x  ðz;x s
form: uaM ¼ ðzz;x Þc þ ðyz;x Þs
 y;x cÞv ;x þ ðy;x s þ z;x cÞw;x

Appendix B þ ðzðc þ 1Þ þ ysÞðz;x s  y;x cÞ þ ðyðc þ 1Þ  zsÞðy;x s þ z;x cÞ h;x
ðB12bÞ
Following the nomenclature adopted in the present model,
The last term of this expression in h;x can be simplified to:
when the additional term uaM used in Eq. (1) of the original model

is omitted, the displacement components of an arbitrary point M ðzðc þ 1Þ þ ysÞðz;x s  y;x cÞ þ ðyðc þ 1Þ  zsÞðy;x s þ z;x cÞ h;x
on cross section contour are the following: 
¼ ðzz;x þ yy;x Þs  ðyz;x  zy;x Þc h;x ðB12cÞ
uM ¼ u  yaz  zay  xh;x ðB1Þ
Putting in mind the fact that: c2 þ s2 ¼ 2c and taking into account
v M ¼ v  zs þ yc wM ¼ w þ ys þ zc ðB2; 3Þ for (B12c), the axial strain exx becomes:

With: exx ¼ u;x  yðkz þ ay h;x Þ  zðky  az h;x Þ  xh;xx  y;x az

ay ¼ w;x þ w;x c  v ;x s and az ¼ v ;x þ v ;x c þ w;x s ðB4; 5Þ  z;x ay  x;x h;x
1h 2 i
Let us remind that ay and az are rotations about the y and z axes. þ v þ w2;x þ ðy2 þ z2 Þh2x;x  2ðy2;x þ z2;x Þc
2 ;x
Eqs. (B1)–(B3) are highly non-linear in presence of torsion and
 ½zðc þ 1Þ þ ysv ;x h;x þ ½yðc þ 1Þ  zsw;x h;x  ðz;x s
flexural–torsional coupling. A linearized version of Eqs. (B1)–(B3)
leads to Vlasov’s classical equations frequently used in  y;x cÞv ;x þ ðy;x s þ z;x cÞw;x

thin-walled beam structures (i.e. uM ¼ u  yv ;z  zw;y  xh;x ;
v M ¼ v  zh; wM ¼ w þ yhÞ.
From relationships (B1)–(B3), an original model has been inves-
tigated in Ronagh [37] and applied to the behavior and the stability
of tapered beams. We remind that in (B1)–(B5), the functions c and
s are truncated forms of the trigonometric functions c = cosh  1
and s = sinh. According to these relationships (B1)–(B3), the
Green’s strain tensor components have been derived in (10)–(12).
Details are given below on the origin of these expressions. In the
þ ðzz;x þ yy;x Þs  ðyz;x  zy;x Þc h;x ðB12dÞ
After development and taking account for definitions (B4,5) for ay
and az , the term in the 3rd line of (B12d) leads to:
½zðc þ 1Þ þ ysv ;x h;x þ ½yðc þ 1Þ  zsw;x h;x  ðz;x s
 y;x cÞv ;x þ ðy;x s þ z;x cÞw;x
¼ yay h;x  zaz h;x þ y;x ðw;x s þ v ;x cÞ þ z;x ðw;x c  v ;x sÞ ðB12eÞ
148 F. Mohri et al. / Engineering Structures 99 (2015) 132–148
After simplification and taking account for definition of ay and az ,
the axial strain is:
exx ¼ u;x  ykz  zky  xh;xx  y;x v ;x  zw;x
 
 x;x þ ðyz;x  zy;x Þc  ðzz;x þ yy;x Þs h;x
1 2  1967;93(ST 5):233–52.
þ v ;x þ w2;x þ r2 h2;x  ðy2;x þ z2;x Þc ðB13Þ
2 Inzynierii Ladowej 1964;10:161–83.
One assesses the origin of the axial strain component derived in
(10). For the tangential strain components exy and exz (B7) and
(B8), one follows the same procedure by taking into account for
the respective derivatives (B9)–(B11), one gets:
 
@x  
2exy ¼  z þ h;x  Xy with Xy ¼ y;x c þ z;x s ðB15a; bÞ
@y
 
@x  
2exz ¼ y  h;x  Xz with Xz ¼ z;x c  y;x s ðB16a; bÞ
@z
One observes that it is not possible to obtain the torsion tapering
term used in Kitipornchai [34]. Moreover, the shear strain compo-
nents are not linear since higher non-linear terms Xy and Xz are
present. Using the original kinematics (1)–(3) used in the present
model and especially the additional term uaM used in (1) and defined
in (6):
– One justifies the origin of the terms of the axial strain (19) and
particularly the presence of the tapering term Xx .
– One eliminates the terms Xy and Xz and one obtains the classi-
cal linear terms for exy and exz in (22) and (23).
References
[1] Timoshenko SP, Gere JM. Theory of elastic stability. 2nd ed. NY: McGarw-Hill;
1961.
[2] Bazant ZP, Cedolin L. Stability of structures elastic. Inelastic fracture and
damage theories. New York: Dover Publications; 1991.
[3] Galambos TV. Guide to stability design criteria for metal structures. 1st
ed. New York: John Wiley&Sons Inc.; 1998.
[4] Trahair NS. Flexural-torsional buckling of structures. London: Chapman & Hall;
1993.
[5] Hsiao KM, Lin WY. A co-rotational formulation for thin-walled beams with
monosymmetric open section. Comput Methods Appl Mech Eng 2000;190:
1163–85.
[6] Battini JM, Pacoste C. Co-rotational beam elements with warping effects in
instabilities problems. Comput Methods Appl Mech Eng 2002;191:1755–89.
[7] Turkalj G, Brnic J, Prpic-Orsic J. Large rotation analysis of elastic thin-walled
beam-type structures using ESA approach. Comput Struct 2003;81:1851–64.
[8] Mohri F, Damil N, Potier-Ferry M. Large torsion finite element model for thin-
walled beams. Comput Struct 2008;86:671–83.
[9] Dourakopoulos JA, Sapountzakis EJ. Postbuckling analysis of beams of arbitrary
cross section using BEM. Eng Struct 2010;32:3713–24.
[10] AISC LRFD American Institute of Steel Construction (AISC). Load and resistance
factor design. Chicago, AISC; 1994.
[11] BS 5950-1 Structural use of steelwork in buildings. Code of practice for design,
rolled and welded sections, British Standards Institution; 2000.
[12] Eurocode 3: European Committee for Standardization. EN 1993-1-1, Eurocode
3: design of steel structures. Part 1-1: General rules and rules for buildings,
Brussels; 2005.
[13] Bal’ac I, Kolekov’a Y. Critical moments. In: Iv’anyi M, editor. Stability and
ductility of steel structures. Budapest, Akademiai Kiado; 2002.
[14] Mohri F, Brouki A, Roth JC. Theoretical and numerical stability analyses of
unrestrained mono-symmetric thin-walled beams. J Contruct Steel Res 2003;
59:63–90.
[15] Serna MA, L’opez A, Puente I, Yong DJ. Equivalent uniform moment factors for
lateral-torsional buckling of steel members. J Construct Steel Res 2006;62:
566–80.
[16] Lim NH, Park NH, Kang YJ, Sung IH. Elastic buckling of I-beams under linear
moment gradient. Int J Solids Struct 2003;40:5635–47.
[17] Mohri F, Damil N, Potier-Ferry M. Buckling and lateral buckling interaction in
thin-walled beam-column elements with mono-symmetric cross sections.
Appl Math Model 2013;37:3526–40.
[18] Zhang L, Tong GS. Elastic flexural-torsional buckling of thin-walled cantilevers.
Thin-Wall Struct 2008;46:27–37.
View publication stats
[19] Andrade A, Camotim D, Providência e Costa P. On the evaluation of elastic
critical moments in doubly and mono-symmetric I-section cantilevers. J
Construct Steel Res 2007;63:894–908.
[20] Nadai A. Elastische platten. Berlin: Julius Springer; 1925.
[21] Lee GC. Non-uniform torsion of tapered I-beams. J Franklin Inst
1956;262:37–44.
[22] Lee GC, Szabo BA. Torsional response of tapered I-girders. J Struct Div, ASCE
[23] Cywinski Z. Teoria skrecania pretow cienkosciennych o sztywnosci. Archiwum
[24] Bazant ZP. Non uniform torsion of thin-walled bars of variable section. Int
Assoc Bridge Struct Eng 1968;25:17–39.
[25] Brown TG. Lateral torsional buckling of tapered I-beams. J Struct Div, ASCE
1981;107(ST 4):689–97.
[26] Chan SL. Buckling analysis of structures composed of tapered members. J
Struct Eng, ASCE 1990;116(7):1893–906.
[27] Salapas V, Samofalov M, Saraskinas V. FEM stability of tapered beam-columns.
J Eng Manag 2005;11(3):211–6.
[28] Eisenberger M. Stiffness matrices for non-prismatic members including
transverse shear. Comput Struct 1991;40(4):831–5.
[29] Li G-Q, Li J-J. A tapered Timoshenko–Euler beam element for analysis of steel
portal frames. J Construct Steel Res 2002;58:1531–44.
[30] Al-Sadder SZ. Exact expression for stability functions of a general non-
prismatic beam –column member. J Construct Steel Res 2004;60:1561–84.
[31] Ruta P. The application of Chebyshev polynomials to the solution of the
nonprismatic Timoshenko beam vibration problem. J Sound Vib
2006;296:243–63.
[32] Asgarian B, Soltani M, Mohri F. Lateral-torsional buckling of tapered thin-
walled beams with arbitrary cross sections. Thin-Wall Struct 2013;62:96–108.
[33] Soltani M, Asgarian B, Mohri F. Elastic instability and free vibration analyses of
tapered thin-walled beams by the power series method. J Construct Steel Res
2014;96:106–26.
[34] Kitipornchai S, Trahair NS. Elastic stability of tapered I-beams. J Struct Div,
ASCE 1972;98(ST 3):713–28.
[35] Kitipornchai S, Trahair NS. Elastic behaviour of tapered mono symmetric I-
beams. J Struct Div, ASCE 1975;101(ST 8):1661–78.
[36] Bradford MA, Cuk PE. Elastic buckling of tapered monosymmetric I-beams. J
Struct Eng, ASCE 1988;4(5):977–97.
[37] Ronagh HR, Bradford MA, Attard MM. Nonlinear analysis of thin-walled
members of variable cross-section. Part I: Theory. Comput Struct 2000;77(3):
285–99.
[38] Ronagh HR, Bradford MA, Attard MM. Nonlinear analysis of thin-walled members
of variable cross-section. Part II: Application. Comput Struct 2000;77(3):301–13.
[39] Andrade A, Camotim D. Lateral-torsional buckling of singly symmetric tapered
beams: theory and applications. J Eng Mech, ASCE 2005;131(6):579–86.
[40] Andrade A, Camotim D, Borges Dinis P. Lateral-torsional buckling of singly
symmetric web-tapered thin-walled I-beams. 1D model vs. shell FEA. Comput
Struct 2007;85:1343–59.
[41] Yau JD. Stability of tapered I-Beams under torsional moments. Finite Elem Anal
Des 2006;42:914–27.
[42] Challamel N, Andrade A, Camotim D. An analytical study on the lateral-
torsional buckling of linearly tapered cantilever strip beams. Int J Struct Stab
Dynam 2007;7(3):441–56.
[43] Benyamina AB, Meftah SA, Mohri F, Daya EM. Analytical solutions attempt for
lateral torsional buckling of doubly-symmetric web-tapered I beams. Eng
Struct 2013;56:1207–19.
[44] Liliana Marques, Luís Simões da Silva, Carlos Rebelo, Aldina Santiago.
Extension of EC3-1-1 interaction formulae for the stability verification of
tapered beam-columns. J Construct Steel Res 2014;100:122–35.
[45] Trahair NS. Interaction buckling of tapered beams. Eng Struct 2014;62–
63:174–80.
[46] Kováč M. Lateral-torsional buckling of web-tapered I-beams. 1D and 3D FEM
ApproachProcedia Eng 2012;40:217–22.
[47] Rajasekaran S. Equations for tapered thin-walled beams of generic open
section. J Eng Mech 1994;120(8):1607–29.
[48] Boissonnade N. Mise au point d’un élément fini de poutre à section variable.
In: 16èmecongrès de mécanique, Nice, France; 2003.
[49] Attard MM. Lateral buckling analysis of beams by the FEM. Comput Struct
1986;23:217–31.
[50] Yang YB, Yau JD. Stability of beams with tapered I-sections. J Eng Mech
1987;113(9):1337–13357.
[51] Mohri F, Damil N, Potier-Ferry M. Review and comparison of finite element
flexural-torsional models for non-linear behaviour of thin-walled beams. Adv
Eng Softw 2015;80:174–87.
[52] Mohri F, Azrar L, Potier-Ferry M. Flexural-torsional post-buckling analysis of
thin-walled elements with open sections. Thin-Wall Struct 2001;39:907–38.
[53] Abaqus 6.11. Dassault Systèmes Simulia Corp. Providence, RI, USA; 2011.
[54] Papp F, Szalai J. Theory and application of the general method of Eurocode 3.
Part 1-1. Eurosteel 2011, August 31–September 2, 2011, Budapest, Hungary.
[55] Bijlaard F, Feldmann M, Naumes J, Sedlacek G. The ‘‘general method’’ for
assessing the out-of-plane stability of structural members and frames and the
comparison with alternative rules in EN 1993 – Eurocode 3 – Part 1-1’’. Steel
Construct 2010;3:19–33.
[56] Mohri F, Damil N, Potier-Ferry M. Theoretical and numerical models for lateral
buckling stability of mono symmetric I section beams. Thin-Wall Struct
2010;46:290–302.