BEAMPASK

BEAMPASK
Finite Length Beam on a Continuous Pasternak Support

Version 11.11
Author: Ren FREUND
ENGINEERING CONSULTANTS LTD
GRANTS & RESTRICTIONS
ATLANTIS Engineering Consultants Ltd. (ATLANTIS) grants to you (the Customer) the non-exclusive
rights with respect to the utilisation of the program BEAMPASK (the Software) and its User Documentation.
One copy of the Software may be made for backup or archival purposes. This Software and Documentation may
otherwise not be used, modified, reproduced, sold, transferred or distributed without ATLANTIS prior written
permission.
No attempt shall be made to de-assemble or de-compile the executable.
WARRANTY
ATLANTIS warrants that the Software and User Documentation are free from defects in material and
workmanship under normal use for a period of two months following its acquisition.
The liability of ATLANTIS under the warranty set forth above shall be limited to the amount paid by the
Customer for the product.
DISCLAIMER
ATLANTIS does not make any warranty expressed or implied as to the use, or the results of use, of the Software
and User Documentation in terms of correctness, accuracy and reliability. The Customer is expected to make the
final evaluation as to the usefulness of the Software in his own environment and shall assume the entire risks as to
its results and performance.
ATLANTIS shall not be liable for any direct, indirect, consequential or incidental damages (including damages
for loss of business profits, business interruption and the like) arising from the use or inability to use the Software
even if ATLANTIS has been advised of the possibility of such damages.
REVISION HISTORY
11.11 Finite-Length Beam
09.09 First Issue
Version Description
BEAMPASK Finite Length Beam on a Continuous Pasternak Support Version 11.11
14/11/11 Page i
CONTENTS
1 SCOPE 1
2 ASSUMPTIONS AND METHODOLOGY 2
2.1 Model 2
2.1.1 Beam 2
2.1.2 Foundation 2
2.1.2.1 Winkler Spring Layer 2
2.1.2.2 Pasternak Shear Layer 3
2.2 Governing Differential Equation 4
2.2.1 Subcritical Deformed Shape 4
2.2.2 Critical Deformed Shape 4
2.2.3 Supercritical Deformed Shape 4
2.2.4 Unitization of Deformed Shape Functions 5
2.3 Forces and Deformations Along an Infinitely Long Strip 6
2.3.1 Concentrated Force 6
2.3.2 Uniformly Distributed Load 7
2.3.3 Triangular Load 8
2.3.4 Concentrated Moment 9
2.4 Beams of Finite Length 10
2.4.1 Soil Layer Deformations Outside the Beam 10
2.4.2 Boundary Conditions 11
2.4.3 Elements of Reduction at Beam Extremities 12
2.4.4 Boundary System 12
2.4.4.1 General Solution 12
3 VARIABLES AND UNITS 14
3.1 Input Data 14
3.2 Default Values 15
3.3 Output Data 15
4 OPERATING LIMITS AND WARNINGS 16
4.1 Recommended Values of the Shear Stiffness 16
4.2 Residual Shear at the Free Edges of a Finite Beam 16
4.3 Infinite Hinged Beam 17
4.4 Finite Length Beam Equivalent to an Infinite Strip 18
4.4.1 Semi-Infinite Beam 18
4.4.1.1 Concentrated Force 18
4.4.1.2 Concentrated Moment 18
4.4.2 Equivalent Stiffness Matrix 18
4.5 Beam in Tension Resting on a Winkler Foundation 19
5 ASSOCIATED ROUTINES 20
5.1 Upstream 20
5.2 Downstream 20
5.3 Related Software 20
6 REFERENCES & BIBLIOGRAPHY 21
6.1 References 21
6.2 Bibliography 22
7 EXAMPLES 24
7.1 Infinite Beam 24
7.1.1 Concentrated Load 24
7.1.1.1 Winkler Model 25
7.1.1.2 Sub-Critical Pasternak Model 26
14/11/11 Page ii
7.1.1.3 Critical Pasternak Model 27
7.1.1.4 Super-Critical Pasternak Model 28
7.1.2 Uniform Load 32
7.2 Semi-Infinite Beam 34
7.2.1 Winkler Foundation 35
7.2.2 0% Deflection Ratio 36
7.3 Finite Beam 39
7.3.1 Centrally Loaded Beam 39
7.3.2 Beam Loaded at its Edges 39
7.4 Finite Beam Equivalent to an Infinite Strip 43
7.4.1 Concentrated Load at 1.0m from Right Support 43
14/11/11 Page 1
1 SCOPE
The program computes the forces and deformations along an infinite Euler-Bernoulli beam subjected to a vertical
concentrated load and resting horizontally on an elastic two-parameter Pasternak foundation.
KEYWORDS
two-parameter foundation, Pasternak layer, Winkler layer, modulus of subgrade reaction, shear modulus
Figure 1-1 Projected Freeway Extension Outside Los Angeles, CA
14/11/11 Page 2
2 ASSUMPTIONS AND METHODOLOGY
2.1 Model
2.1.1 Beam
The beam is characterized by a constant width B and flexural rigidity EI over its entire length L.
The system attached to the beam is such that
the origin is set at the left extremity of the beam,
the x-axis corresponds to the beam centerline, directed from left to right,
the y-axis is positive upwards.
2.1.2 Foundation
The soil is regarded as an elastic medium represented by a two-parameter Winkler-Pasternak model.
Figure 2-1 Infinite Beam on a Pasternak Foundation [from Ref./3/]
2.1.2.1 Winkler Spring Layer
This representation assumes that the vertical reaction force exerted by the foundation at any point is proportional
to the beam deflection at that point alone.
y kB p
where
k = modulus of subgrade reaction of the soil
The combined flexural rigidity of the beam and spring stiffness of the soil can be merged into the foundation
parameter which has dimension L
-1
.
14/11/11 Page 3
4
4EI
kB

2.1.2.2 Pasternak Shear Layer
The shear force Q in the Pasternak layer is proportional to the rotation of the beam at this section
dx
dy
GB Q
The ratio of flexural to shear stiffness is expressed by the parameter which has dimension L
-1
.
G
k

Figure 2-2 Hard Landing of an Antonov 124 Under Strong Lateral Winds
14/11/11 Page 4
2.2 Governing Differential Equation
The expression of the deflection in any section of an infinitely long strip resting on a continuous elastic support
and supporting the load w(x) is the solution of the 4
th
order differential equation
) (
2
2
4
4
x w kBy
dx
y d
GB
dx
y d
EI + [1]
The normalized associated homogeneous equation
0 4 4
4
2
2
2
4
4
+ y
dx
y d
dx
y d
where
kEI
B G
2
2
,
_
is transformed to the characteristic equation 0 4 4

4 2 2 4
+ r r where
rx
e y
which admits the roots
,
_
t t 1 2
2
4 , 3 , 2 , 1
r
These roots are all either complex conjugate or real, depending on the magnitude of with respect to unity.
The integration constants C and D factoring the positive exponential term in the solution of the homogeneous
equation are identically equal to zero on the conditions that the deflections of the beam must remain finite far
away from the loaded area.
2.2.1 Subcritical Deformed Shape
When the flexural stiffness of the beam prevails over the shear stiffness of the soil, then < 1 and
i r t t
4 , 3 , 2 , 1
where

+
1
1
The solution of the homogeneous equation becomes
[ ] [ ] x D x C e x B x A e y
x x

sin cos sin cos + + +

2.2.2 Critical Deformed Shape
When the flexural stiffness of the beam is about equivalent to the shear stiffness of the soil, then = 1 and
t
2 , 1
r where 2
[ ] [ ] Dx C e Bx A e y
x x
+ + +

2.2.3 Supercritical Deformed Shape
When the shear stiffness of the soil prevails over the flexural stiffness of the beam, then > 1 and
t t
4 , 3 , 2 , 1
r where
1
1

+

[ ] [ ] x D x C e x B x A e y
x x

sinh cosh sinh cosh + + +

14/11/11 Page 5
2.2.4 Unitization of Deformed Shape Functions
The above equation can be expressed analytically in terms of hyperbolic, polynomials or circular functions
depending on the rigidity ratio , i.e. whether or not the shear rigidity of the Pasternak layer prevails over the
flexural stiffness of the beam combined with the spring stiffness of the Winkler layer.
function 0 < 1 = 1 > 1
) (
0
x f x cos 1 x cosh
) (
1
x f
x sin
x
x sinh
) (
2
x f
2
cos 1
x
2
2
x
2
1 cosh
x
) (
3
x f
3
sin
x x
6
3
x
3
sinh
x x
) (
4
x f
4
2
cos 2 / ) ( 1
x x
24
4
x
4
2
2 / ) ( 1 cosh
x x
Those functions are more conveniently represented here by their series development
) ( x f
n
( )
0
2
)! 2 (
i
i
n
n i
x
x

! n
x
n
( )
( )
+

0
2
)! 2 (
1
i
i
i n
n i
x
x

Figure 2-3 High Speed Track of the East TGV
14/11/11 Page 6
2.3 Forces and Deformations Along an Infinitely Long Strip
The forces and deformations along the continuous beam (x 0) at the point of load application are
( )
1
1
1
if
cosh
cos
) (
2
0
>
<
'
x e
e
x e
x f e x
x
x
x
x
( ) ( ) [ ] x x x
dx
d

+ ) (
( )
( )
1
1
1
if
sinh cosh
2
1
sin cos
) (
2
1
0
>
<
'
1
]
1
+
1
]
1
+
1
]
1
1
]
1
x x
e
x e
x x
e
x f
x f
e x
x
x
x
x
) ( 2 ) ( x x
dx
d

( )
1
1
1
if
sinh
2
sin
) (
2
2
2
1
2
>
<
'
x e
x e
x e
x f e x
x
x
x
x
) ( ) ( x x
dx
d

( )
( )
1
1
1
if
sinh cosh
2
1
sin cos
) (
2
1
0
>
<
'
1
]
1
1
]
1
1
]
1
1
]
1
x x
e
x e
x x
e
x f
x f
e x
x
x
x
x
( ) [ ] x x x
dx
d

) ( 2 ) (
2.3.1 Concentrated Force
The concentrated load P is counted positive when directed downwards.
The local origin is set at the point of application of the load.
Figure 2-4 Concentrated Load
14/11/11 Page 7
Because of symmetry only formulas for x 0 need to be considered.
( ) [ ]
) (
) (
2
) (
4
) (
4
) (
8
2
3
x P Q
x x
P
V
x
P
M
x
EI
P
x
EI
P
y

2.3.2 Uniformly Distributed Load
The load intensity is constant equal to q over a length 2a and zero outside this area. It is counted positive when
directed downwards.
The local origin is set at the center of the loaded area.
Figure 2-5 Uniformly Distributed Load
Because of symmetry only formulae for x 0 need to be considered.
The formulae below are derived from the integral ( ) ( ) ( ) [ ] u u du u
1
The shear force in the Pasternak layer is
2
4EI Q
14/11/11 Page 8
section 0<x<a
[ ] { }
[ ]
[ ]
[ ] ) ( ) (
4
) ( ) (
4
) ( ) (
8
) ( ) ( ) ( ) ( 2
8
2
3
4
x a x a
q
V
x a x a
q
M
x a x a
EI
q
x a x a x a x a
EI
q
y
+
+ +
+
+ + +

[2]
section x>a
[ ] { }
[ ]
[ ]
[ ] ) ( ) (
4
) ( ) (
4
) ( ) (
8
) ( ) ( ) ( ) (
8
2
3
4
a x a x
q
V
a x a x
q
M
a x a x
EI
q
a x a x a x a x
EI
q
y
+
+
+
+ + +

[3]
2.3.3 Triangular Load
The load intensity is linearly increasing from zero to q over a length a and equal to zero outside this interval. It is
counted positive when directed downward.
The local origin is set at the start of the loaded area.
The formulae below are derived from the integral ( ) ( )
( )
( )
( )
1
]
1
+
1
]
1
u
u u
u
u u du u u
2
1
The shear force in the Pasternak layer is
2
4EI Q
section x<0
[ ] { }
[ ] { }
[ ]
[ ] ) ( ) ( ) (
4
) ( 2 ) ( ) (
8
) ( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) (
8
) ( ) ( ) ( 2 ) ( 2 ) ( ) (
16
2
3
4
5
x a a x x a
a
q
V
x a a x x a
a
q
M
x x a x a a x x a
a EI
q
x a a x a x x a a x a x
a EI
q
y

+
+ +
+

[4]
14/11/11 Page 9
section 0<x<a
[ ] { }
[ ] { }
[ ]
[ ] ) ( ) ( ) (
4
) ( 2 ) ( ) (
8
) ( ) ( 2 ) ( ) ( ) (
8
) ( ) ( ) ( 2 4 ) ( 2 ) ( ) (
16
2
3
4
5
x a a x x a
a
q
V
x a a x x a
a
q
M
x x a x a a x x a
a EI
q
x a a x a x x x a a x a x
a EI
q
y

+
+ +
+ +

[5]
section x>a
[ ] { }
[ ] { }
[ ]
[ ] ) ( ) ( ) (
4
) ( 2 ) ( ) (
8
) ( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) (
8
) ( ) ( ) ( 2 ) ( 2 ) ( ) (
16
2
3
4
5
a x a x a x
a
q
V
a x a x a x
a
q
M
x a x a x a x a x
a EI
q
a x a a x x a x a a x x
a EI
q
y
+

+ +
+ + +

[6]
2.3.4 Concentrated Moment
The concentrated moment C is counted positive when applied clockwise.
The local origin is set at the point of application of the couple.
Figure 2-6 Concentrated Couple
14/11/11 Page 10
Because of symmetry only formulae for x 0 need to be considered.
( ) [ ]
( ) [ ]
) (
2 ) (
2
) (
2
) (
4
) (
4
2
x C Q
x x
C
V
x x
C
M
x
EI
C
x
EI
C
y

+

2.4 Beams of Finite Length
2.4.1 Soil Layer Deformations Outside the Beam
Whereas the 4
th
order differential equation [1] prevails within the inner domain 0 x L covering the finite
length of the beam, the deformations of the semi-infinite soil layer outside the beam (EI = 0; outer domain) are
governed by the 2
nd
order differential equation
0
2
2
+ ky
dx
y d
G [7]
which admits the solution
1
1
]
1

G
k
x y y exp
0
where
x = absolute distance measured from the extremity of the beam
0
y = deformation of the soil layer just outside the beam edge
Figure 2-7 Semi-Infinite Beam on a Pasternak Foundation [from Ref./ 3/]
14/11/11 Page 11
The program assumes that the soil deformation y
0
is only a fraction u of the deflection at the edge of the beam
where 0 u 1.
The restraining effect of the Pasternak soil layer on both sides of the beam can therefore be reduced to equivalent
linear springs by reference to the vertical deflection at the edges of the beam
kG uB
dx
dy
y
GB
u H
x
S

0 0
2.4.2 Boundary Conditions
The most general elastic restraint provided by the supports at either extremity of the beam are expressed by a
linear elastic, symmetrical stiffness matrix
at end (B)
1
]
1
B B
B B
B
K J
J H
K
at origin (A)
1
]
1
A A
A A
A
K J
J H
K
where
- H
A
, H
B
shear spring terms,
- K
A
, K
B
rotational spring terms,
- J
A
, J
B
coupling spring terms.
The most general boundary conditions at the beam extremities are therefore expressed by the equations
- end (x = L)

,
_
1
]
1
,
_
L
L
B B
B S B
B
B
y
K J
J H H
M
R
- origin (x = 0)

,
_
1
]
1
,
_
0
0
y
K J
J H H
M
R
A A
A S A
A
A
where
R
B
= -V
L
-Q
L
= vertical reaction applied by the end support B to the beam
M
B
= -M
L
= moment applied by the end support B to the beam
R
A
= +V
0
+Q
0
= vertical reaction applied by the start support A to the beam
M
A
= +M
0
= moment applied by the start support A to the beam
It ought to be noted that
the reactions applied to the beam by the end support B have opposite sign compared to the shear and moment
in that section,
the vertical reactions R
A
and R
B
are the sum of shear forces in the beam and in the Pasternak layer
respectively.
14/11/11 Page 12
2.4.3 Elements of Reduction at Beam Extremities
The elements of reduction in the section just ahead of the end of the beam (x = L-) are
( )
( )
,
_
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
]
1

+
+
,
_
,
_
+
A
A
B
B
L L
L L
L L L
L L L
L
L
L
L L
L
L
L
L L
C
P
C
P
kB kB kB
kB kB kB
y
M
Q V
y
M
Q V

2 2
3 2 4
2
2
0
2
0
2
1
4
1
2
1
4
1
2 2
1
2 2
1
The elements of reduction in the section just past the start of the beam (x = ) are
( )
( )
,
_
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
]
1

+
+
,
_
,
_
+
A
A
B
B
L L
L L
L L L
L L L
C
P
C
P
kB kB kB
kB kB kB
y
M
Q V
y
M
Q V
0
2 2
0
2
1
4
1
2
1
4
1
2 2
1
2 2
1
2 2
4 3 2
2
0
0
0
0 0
0
0
0
0 0

where a bar designates the elements of reduction associated to the infinite strip computed at the extremities of the
finite length beam and

/ ) 0 (
) (
/ ) 0 (
) (
0 ) 0 (
) (
1 ) 0 (
) (
L L L L
L L L L
2.4.4 Boundary System
2.4.4.1 General Solution
The auxiliary forces P
A
and P
B
and moments C
A
and C
B
are the solution of the system
[ ]
,
_

+ + +
+ +
+
,
_
0
2
0 0
0 2 0 0 0
2
2
kB
y
kB
M
kB
y
kB
Q V
kB
y
kB
M
kB
y
kB
Q V
C
P
C
P
A A
A A
L B L B L
L B L B L L
A
A
B
B
S [8]
14/11/11 Page 13
where
( ) B A
kB
K
kB
J
kB
H H
S
,
3 2
+

[9]
and
[ ]
1
]
1
A lA
LB B
0
0
S S
S S
S [10]
[ ]
1
1
]
1
+
1
1
1
1
]
1
+
1
1
]
1
+
1
1
1
1
]
1
0
0 0
0
2
0
0 0
0
2
2
1
4
2 2
1
0 B B B B
S
[ ]
1
]
1
+
1
1
]
1

+
1
1
]
1

+
1
1
1
1
]
1
+
1
1
1
1
]
1
L L
B
L
L
L L
B
L
L
B
L
L
L L
L L
LB

0 0
2
0 0
2
2
0
0
2
2 4
2 2
S
[ ]
1
]
1

+
1
1
]
1
+
1
1
]
1
+
1
1
1
1
]
1
+
1
1
1
1
]
1
L L
A
L
L
L L
A
L
L
A
L
L
L L
L L
LA

0 0
2
0 0
2
2
0
0
2
2 4
2 2
S
[ ]
1
1
]
1
+
1
1
1
1
]
1
+
1
1
]
1
+
1
1
1
1
]
1
0
0 0
0
2
0
0 0
0
2
2
1
4
2 2
1
0 A A A A
S
14/11/11 Page 14
3 VARIABLES AND UNITS
Text Program Description Unit
3.1 Input Data
EI EI flexural rigidity of the beam KN*m
2
B B width of foundation m
u u deflection ratio
k k modulus of subgrade reaction KN/m
3
G G shear stiffness of soil KN/m
Np number of concentrated forces
d d distance from member origin of concentrated force j m
P P intensity of concentrated force j KN
x x distance of section from member origin m
Figure 3-1 Mudmats on a GoM Jacket
14/11/11 Page 15
3.2 Default Values
u = 0 [] (no load transfer to soil outside the beam)
k = 10
4
[KN/m
3
] (soft to medium clay)
G = 0 [KN/m] (Winkler foundation)
3.3 Output Data
M M moment in section x KN*m
V V shear in section x KN
y y vertical deflection of section x m
r rotation of section x rad

p p subgrade reaction KN/m
Q Q shear in soil layer KN
Figure 3-2 Distorted Track Across a Seismic Fault
14/11/11 Page 16
4 OPERATING LIMITS AND WARNINGS
4.1 Recommended Values of the Shear Stiffness
Tanahashi (Ref./ 3/) recommends the following values for the dimensionless product H in elastic layers having
the thickness H as a function of the Poissons ratio
0
of the soil
0
[-] 0.0 0.1 0.2 0.3
H [-] 4.3 4.3 4.5 5.4
Table 4-1 Recommended Dimensionless Product H [from Ref./3/]
The accuracy of this product is estimated not to exceed 10% as long as the ratio of the loaded length L by the
depth of the layer remains within the limits
0 . 5 / 1 . 0 H L
Figure 4-1 Comparative Settlements of Winkler and Pasternak Foundations
4.2 Residual Shear at the Free Edges of a Finite Beam
The boundary conditions at the extremities of the finite length free beam defined in Section 2.4.1 yield the
peculiar result that shear at the edges of this beam is not identically zero in general. In particular when the
deflection ratio u is set equal to zero, shear forces in the beam and in the inner Paternak layer balance each other,
i.e. V + Q 0, and no force is transferred to the soil outside the foundation.
This residual shear actually causes the slope discontinuity observed for the Pasternak layer in this section.
Imposing V 0 at both ends of the finite beam would create two additional equations incompatible with the
degree (4
th
) of the constitutive differential equation [1].
This residual shear remains nevertheless of comparatively small magnitude, and its perturbating effect on forces
and deformations in the beam dies out rapidly away from the extremities.
14/11/11 Page 17
4.3 Infinite Hinged Beam
Because of symmetry the concentrated load P is equally split between the left and right side of the beam.
A portion of the half load P/2 is directly transferred to the shear layer as a result of the slope of the beam being
non-zero at the vertical of the load.
The boundary conditions at the hinge are therefore
2
0
0
0
3
3
0
2
2
P
dx
dy
GB
dx
y d
EI
dx
y d
x
x
x

The forces and deformations along the beam hinged at the point of load application are
( ) ( )
2 1 4
4
+
+

x x
EI
P
y
( )
2 1 4
3
+

x
EI
P
( )
2 1 2
2
+

x P
M
( )
2 1 2 +

x P
V
( )
2 1+

x P
Q
Figure 4-2 Infinite Hinged Beam on a Pasternak Foundation [from Ref./ 3/]
The load P is transferred to the system in the respective proportions
2 1
1
+
to the beam
2 1
2
+
to the Pasternak layer
14/11/11 Page 18
4.4 Finite Length Beam Equivalent to an Infinite Strip
4.4.1 Semi-Infinite Beam
The forces and deformations along a semi-infinite beam subjected to concentrated loading at its (left) free
extremity are found under the assumptions of zero deformation ratio (u = 0).
4.4.1.1 Concentrated Force
The shear, moment and deformation of a semi-infinite beam subjected to a concentrated force P
0
at its free edge
are derived by substituting P with 2P
0
in the expressions in Section 4.3 for the infinite hinged beam.
4.4.1.2 Concentrated Moment
The shear, moment and deformation of a semi-infinite beam subjected to a concentrated moment C
0
at its free
edge are found by expressing the boundary conditions at this extremity
0
0 0
3
3
0
0
2
2

x x
x
dx
dy
GB
dx
y d
EI
C
dx
y d
EI
yielding
( )
2 1 2
3
0
+

x
EI
C
y
( ) ( )
2 1
2
0
+

x x
EI
C
( ) ( )
2 1
2
0
+
+

x x C
M
( ) ( ) ( )
2 1
2 2 1
2
2
0
+
+

x x
C V
( ) ( )
2 1
4
0
+

x x
C Q
4.4.2 Equivalent Stiffness Matrix
A semi-infinite beam on an elastic foundation can be exactly replaced by an equivalent stiffness matrix.
The terms of this matrix are directly derived from the deformations at the (left) free extremity of the semi-infinite
beam subjected to a force P
0
and a moment C
0
at this point
( )

,
_
1
1
1
1
]
1
,
_
0
0
2 2
2 4
0
0
2
1
2
1
2
2 1
1
C
P
EI
y

14/11/11 Page 19
Equivalent stiffness matrices can therefore be defined
at the left extremity of a semi-infinite beam extending forward right
1
]
1
+
+

2 2
2 4
2
2 2
EI
B
K
at the right extremity of a semi-infinite beam extending backward left
1
]
1

2 2
2 4
2
2 2
EI
A
K
Any infinite strip subjected to an arbitrary loading can hence be replaced by a beam of finite length with left and
right boundaries defined by the stiffness matrices K
A
and K
B
respectively. As long as this equivalent shorter beam
fully encompasses the loaded zone, the forces and displacements in any section are rigorously identical to those in
the infinite strip, and are also independent of the position of the extremities A and B of the beam outside the
loaded area.
4.5 Beam in Tension Resting on a Winkler Foundation
Hentnyi (Ref./ 1/) derived the following homogeneous differential equation for a prismatic Euler beam subjected
to the constant axial tension N and resting on an elastic Winkler foundation.
0
2
2
4
4
+ kBy
dx
y d
N
dx
y d
EI
By analogy with equation [1], the shear resistance GB of the Pasternak layer can therefore be regarded as
equivalent to a fictitious tensile force N in the beam. Owing to the range of values customary accepted for the
shear modulus G, the order of magnitude of this equivalent force generally exceeds the tensile capacity of the
beam cross-section.
Figure 4-3 Infinitesimal Element of a Beam Under Tension on a Winkler Foundation [from Ref./ 1/]
14/11/11 Page 20
5 ASSOCIATED ROUTINES
5.1 Upstream
BEAMPASKcalls the following program as subroutine
- BEAMWINK Finite Length Beam on a Continuous Winkler Support
5.2 Downstream
None
5.3 Related Software
None
Figure 5-1 Overturned Buildings After the 1964 Niigata Quake [courtesy NOAA]
14/11/11 Page 21
6 REFERENCES & BIBLIOGRAPHY
6.1 References
1. HETNYI, M. - Beams on Elastic Foundation / The University of Michigan Press, Ann Arbor, MI [1946]
2. PATIL, V.A., SAWANT, V.A. & DEB, K. Use of Finite and Infinite Elements in Static Analysis of
Pavement / Interaction & Multiscale Mechanics, Vol. 3, No 1, pp. 95-110 [2010]
3. TANAHASHI, H. Formulas for an Infinitely Long Euler-Bernoulli Beam on the Pasternak Model / Soils &
Foundations, Vol. 44, No 5, pp. 109-118 [Oct2004]
4. TEODORU, I.B., MUSAT, V. & VRABIE, M. A Finite Element Study of the Bending Behavior of Beams
Resting on Two-Parameter Elastic Foundation / Bulletin of the Polytechnic Institute of Jassy, Vol. LII, No 3-
4 [2006]
5. Van CAUWELAERT, F. Pavement Design and Evaluation The Required Mathematics and its
Applications / Federation of the Belgian Cement Industry, Brussels, Belgium [Dec2003]
6. VLASOV, V.Z. & LEONTIEV, N.N. Beams, Plates and Shells on Elastic Foundation / Fizmatgiz,
Moscow, Russia [1960]
Figure 6-1 Loadout Skidway of an Offshore Jacket
14/11/11 Page 22
6.2 Bibliography
7. AYDOGAN, M.- Stiffness Matrix Formulation of Beams with Shear Effect on Elastic Foundation / J.
Structural Engrg, ASCE, Vol. 121, No 9, pp. 1265-1270 [1995]
8. BARROS, P.L., PAVANELLO, R., NETO, E.M. & MOROOKA, C.K. SCR-Seafloor Interaction
Modelling with Winkler, Pasternak and Kerr Beam-on-Elastic-Foundation Theories / Proc.28
th
Intl OMAE
Conf., paper OMAE2009-79459, Honolulu, Hawaii [Jun2009]
9. CHIWANGA, M. & VALSANGKAR, A.J. Generalized Beam Element on Two-Parameter Elastic
Foundation / J. Structural Engrg, Vol. 114, No 8, pp. 1414-1427 [1988]
10. DUTTA, S.C. & ROY, R. A Critical Review on Idealization and Modeling for Interaction Among Soil-
Foundation-Structure System / Computers & Structures, Vol. 80, No 20-21, pp. 1579-1594 [Aug2002]
11. EISENBERGER, M. & CLASTORNIK, J. Beams on Variable Two-Parameter Elastic Foundations / J.
Engineering Mechanics, Vol. 113, No 10, pp. 1454-1466 [1987]
12. EL-MOUSLY, M. Fundamental Frequencies of Timoshenko Beams Mounted on Pasternak Foundation / J.
Sound & Vibration, Vol. 228, No 2, pp. 452-457 [Nov1999]
13. FILONENKO-BORODICH, M.M. Some Approximate Theories of the Elastic Foundation / Uchenyie
Zapiski Moskovskogo Gosudarstrennogo Universiteta Mekhanica, Vol. 46, No 3, Moscow, Russia [1940]
14. FILONENKO-BORODICH, M.M. A Very Simple Model of an Elastic Foundation Capable of Spreading
the Load / Sb. Tr. Mosk. Elektro. Inst. Inzh. Tran., No 53, Moscow, Russia [1945]
15. GULKAN, P. & ALEMDAR, B.N. Exact Finite Element for a Beam on a Two-Parameter Elastic
Foundation: a Revisit / Structural Engineering & Mechanics, Vol. 7, No 3, pp. 259-276 [1999]
16. HARR, M.E., DAVIDSON, J.L., HO, D., POMBO, L.E., RAMASWAMY, S.V. & ROSNER, J.C. Euler
Beams on a Two Parameter Foundation Model / J. Soil Mech. & Foundation Div., ASCE, Vol. 95, No SM4,
pp. 933-948 [1969]
17. HORIBE, T. & ASANO, N. Large Deflection Analysis of Beams on Two-Parameter Elastic Foundation
Using the Boundary Integral Equation Method / Intl J. Japanese Society of Mechanical Engineers, Series A,
Vol. 44, No 2, pp. 231-236 [2001]
18. KARAMANLIDIS, D. & PRAKASH, V. Exact Transfer and Stiffness Matrices for a Beam/Column
Resting on a Two-Parameter Foundation / Computer Methods in Appl. Mech. Engrg, Vol. 72, pp. 77-89
19. KERR, A.D. Viscoelastic Winkler Foundation with Shear Interactions / J. Engrg Mech. Div., ASCE, Vol.
87, No EM3, pp. 13-30 [Jun1961]
20. KERR, A.D. Elastic and Viscoelastic Foundation Models / J. Applied Mech., ASCE, Vol. 31, pp. 491-498
[1964]
21. KERR, A.D. A Study of a New Foundation Model / Acta Mechanica, Vol. 1, pp. 135-147 [1965]
22. KERR, A.D. On the Formal Development of Elastic Foundation Models / Ingenieur-Archiv, Vol. 54, pp.
455-464 [1984]
23. KERR, A.D. Application of Pasternak Model to Some Soil-Structure Interaction Problems [May1985]
24. KERR, A.D. & COFFIN, D.W. Beams on a Two-Dimensional Pasternak Base Subjected to Loads That
Cause Lift-Off / Intl J. Solids & Structures, Vol. 28, No 4, pp. 413-422 [1991]
25. MA, X., BUTTERWORTH, J.W. & CLIFTON, G.C. Static Analysis of an Infinite Beam Resting on a
Tensionless Pasternak Foundation / European J. Mechanics & Solids, Vol. 28, No 4, pp. 697-703 [Jul2009]
26. MORFIDIS, K. & AVRAMIDIS, I.E. Formulation of a Generalized Beam Element on a Two-Parameter
Elastic Foundation With Semi-Rigid Connections and Rigid Offsets / Computers & Structures, Vol. 80, No
25, pp. 1919-1934 [2002]
27. NOGAMI, T. & ONEILL, M.W. Beam on Generalized Two-Parameter Foundation / J. Engrg Mech. Div.,
ASCE, Vol. 111, No 5, pp. 664-679 [1985]
28. ONU, G. Shear Effect in Beam Finite Element on Two-Parameter Elastic Foundation / J. Structural Engrg,
Vol. 126, No 9, pp. 1104-1107 [2000]
29. PASTERNAK, P.L. On a New Method of Analysis of an Elastic Foundation by Means of Two Foundation
Constants / Gosudarstvennoe Izdatelstvo Literaturi po Stroitelstvu I Arkhitekture, Moscow, Russia [1954]
30. POOROOSHASB, H.B., PIETRUSZCZAK, S. & ASHTAKALA, B. An Extension of the Pasternak
Foundation Concept / Soils & Foundations, Vol. 25, No 3, pp. 31-40 [Sep1985]
14/11/11 Page 23
31. PRONK, A.C. The Pasternak Foundation: An Attractive Alternative for the Winkler Foundation / Proc. 5
th
Intl Conf. on Concrete Pavement Design & Rehabilitation, Vol. 1, Purdue Univ., West Lafayette, Indiana
[1993]
32. PRONK, A.C. & Van Den BOL, M.E. Winkler - Pasternak - Kerr Foundations : Notes on Boundary
Conditions / BCRA Conf., Trondheim, Norway [1998]
33. SHIRIMA, L.M. & GIGER, M.W. Timoshenko Beam Element Resting on Two-Parameter Elastic
Foundation / J. Engrg Mech. Div., ASCE, Vol. 118, No 2, pp. 280-295 [1992]
34. TANAHASHI, H. Probability-Based Prediction of Differential Settlements of Structures Using Timoshenko
Beam on Pasternak Model / Soils & Foundations, Vol. 34, No 1, pp. 77-89 [Mar1994]
35. TANAHASHI, H. Two-Dimensional Analysis of Ground Surface Displacements Using Pasternak Model /
J. Struct. Constr. Engrg, AIJ, No 530, pp. 85-91 [Apr2000]
36. VALLABHAN, C.V.G. & DAS, Y.C. Parametric Study of Beams on Elastic Foundations / J. Engineering
Mechanics, ASCE, Vol. 114, No 12, pp. 2072-2082 [Dec1988]
37. VALLABHAN, C.V.G. & DAS, Y.C. A Refined Model for Beams on Elastic Foundations / Intl J. Solids
& Structures, Vol. 27, No 5, pp. 628-637 [1991]
38. VALLABHAN, C.V.G. & DAS, Y.C. Modified Vlasov Model for Beams on Elastic Foundations / J.
Geotechnical Eng., Vol. 117, No 6, pp. 956-966 [Jun1991]
39. WANG, T.M. & GAGNON, L.W. Vibrations of Continuous Timoshenko Beams on Winkler-Pasternak
Foundations / J. Sound & Vibration, Vol. 59, No 2, pp. 211-220 [Jul1978]
40. WANG, Y.H., THAM, L.G. & CHEUNG, Y.K. Beams and Plates on Elastic Foundation: a Review /
Progress in Structural Engineering & Materials, Vol. 7, No 4, pp. 174-182 [2005]
41. ZHAOHUA, F. & COOK, R.D. Beam Elements on Two-Parameter Elastic Foundations / J. Engrg Mech.
Div., ASCE, Vol. 109, No 6, pp. 1390-1402 [1983]
Figure 6-2 Test Vehicle for Airport Pavement
14/11/11 Page 24
7 EXAMPLES
****************************************************************
* *
* BEAMPASK *
* *
* Finite Length Beam on a Continuous Pasternak Support *
* *
* 12:25:34 Version 11.11 04/11/11 *
* *
****************************************************************
Units : m, rad, KN
7.1 Infinite Beam
7.1.1 Concentrated Load
The runs in this Section reproduce the configurations investigated in Ref./ 3/ of an infinitely long concrete beam
resting on an 18m thick elastic layer represented by a two-parameter soil model and subjected to a concentrated
load P = 2.0 KN.
The soil layer is characterized by
Youngs modulus E
0
= 14.0 [MPa]
Poissons ratio
0
= 0.3 [-]
The coefficient of subgrade reaction is hence found as
( )
( )( )
( )
( )( )
047 . 1
0 . 18 6 . 0 1 3 . 0 1
0 . 14 3 . 0 1
2 1 1
1
0 0
0 0
soil
H
E
k

[MN/m
3
]
The shear stiffness of the soil is derived from Table 4-1 for a Poissons ration
0
= 0.3, hence
[ ]
1
m 300 . 0
0 . 18
4 . 5

and [ ] MN/m 63 . 11
300 . 0
2

k
G
The flexural rigidity of the rectangular concrete beam is
3
3
1750
12
H
BH
E EI
c
[MNm
2
]
where
21000
c
E [MPa] Youngs modulus of concrete
0 . 1 B [m] width of the rectangular concrete section
H [m] depth of the rectangular concrete section (varies with the configuration)
The beam is given an arbitrary length of 400m, the load being applied 200m from either extremity.
14/11/11 Page 25
Supports : left Ho= 0.000E+00 Ko= 0.000E+00 Jo= 0.000E+00
right He= 0.000E+00 Ke= 0.000E+00 Je= 0.000E+00
1 Concentrated Forces
d = 500.0000 P = 2.000E+00
0 Distributed Loads
0 Concentrated Moments
7.1.1.1 Winkler Model
This example considers a 0.666m high beam having the flexural rigidity EI = 517.0 MNm
2
.
The soil is assumed to possess no shear stiffness at all.
This run is essentially presented for calibration purpose with the Winkler routine BEAMWINK.
Beam : L = 400.0000 EI= 5.170E+05 u = 0.0000
Foundation : B = 1.0000 k = 1.047E+03 G = 0.000E+00
The foundation parameters are respectively
[ ]
0
m 150 . 0
0 . 517 4
047 . 1
1
4
Forces and Displacements along the Beam

x = 200.0000 p = 1.500E-01 r = 6.812E-46 y =-1.433E-04
Q = 0.000E+00 M = 3.333E+00 V =-1.000E+00
x = 202.0000 p = 1.390E-01 r = 9.410E-06 y =-1.328E-04
Q = 0.000E+00 M = 1.629E+00 V =-7.077E-01
x = 204.0000 p = 1.144E-01 r = 1.332E-05 y =-1.093E-04
Q = 0.000E+00 M = 4.769E-01 V =-4.529E-01
x = 206.0000 p = 8.568E-02 r = 1.369E-05 y =-8.183E-05
Q = 0.000E+00 M =-2.192E-01 V =-2.527E-01
x = 208.0000 p = 5.848E-02 r = 1.207E-05 y =-5.585E-05
Q = 0.000E+00 M =-5.720E-01 V =-1.091E-01
x = 212.0000 p = 1.851E-02 r = 6.919E-06 y =-1.768E-05
Q = 0.000E+00 M =-6.618E-01 V = 3.756E-02
14/11/11 Page 26
x = 216.0000 p =-8.435E-04 r = 2.634E-06 y = 8.057E-07
Q = 0.000E+00 M =-4.272E-01 V = 6.689E-02
x = 220.0000 p =-6.340E-03 r = 3.019E-07 y = 6.055E-06
Q = 0.000E+00 M =-1.877E-01 V = 4.929E-02
x = 230.0000 p =-1.980E-03 r =-4.667E-07 y = 1.891E-06
Q = 0.000E+00 M = 2.839E-02 V = 2.341E-03
7.1.1.2 Sub-Critical Pasternak Model
This example is based on the same former 0.666m high beam.
The shear stiffness of the soil is set equal to 11.63 MPa from this example onwards.
Beam : L = 400.0000 EI= 5.170E+05 u = 0.0000
[ ]
250 . 0
300 . 0
150 . 0
m 150 . 0
2
1

,
_

x = 200.0000 p = 1.342E-01 r =-6.747E-49 y =-1.281E-04
Q = 7.847E-45 M = 2.981E+00 V =-1.000E+00
x = 202.0000 p = 1.245E-01 r = 8.155E-06 y =-1.189E-04
Q =-9.484E-02 M = 1.353E+00 V =-6.436E-01
x = 204.0000 p = 1.035E-01 r = 1.127E-05 y =-9.887E-05
Q =-1.311E-01 M = 3.460E-01 V =-3.783E-01
x = 206.0000 p = 7.940E-02 r = 1.141E-05 y =-7.583E-05
Q =-1.327E-01 M =-2.137E-01 V =-1.937E-01
x = 208.0000 p = 5.681E-02 r = 1.000E-05 y =-5.426E-05
Q =-1.163E-01 M =-4.723E-01 V =-7.432E-02
x = 212.0000 p = 2.336E-02 r = 5.933E-06 y =-2.231E-05
Q =-6.900E-02 M =-5.097E-01 V = 3.291E-02
x = 216.0000 p = 5.885E-03 r = 2.651E-06 y =-5.620E-06
Q =-3.083E-02 M =-3.289E-01 V = 4.864E-02
x = 220.0000 p =-8.840E-04 r = 8.019E-07 y = 8.443E-07
14/11/11 Page 27
Q =-9.326E-03 M =-1.587E-01 V = 3.457E-02
x = 230.0000 p =-1.414E-03 r =-1.988E-07 y = 1.350E-06
Q = 2.313E-03 M = 3.069E-03 V = 3.597E-03
7.1.1.3 Critical Pasternak Model
This example is based on a shallow 0.2643m high beam having the flexural rigidity EI = 32.31 MNm
2
.
Beam : L = 400.0000 EI= 3.231E+04 u = 0.0000
[ ]
000 . 1
300 . 0
300 . 0
m 300 . 0
31 . 32 4
047 . 1
2
1
4

,
_

x = 200.0000 p = 2.122E-01 r =-1.078E-88 y =-2.026E-04
Q = 1.254E-84 M = 1.179E+00 V =-1.000E+00
x = 202.0000 p = 1.679E-01 r = 3.123E-05 y =-1.603E-04
Q =-3.632E-01 M = 7.641E-02 V =-2.465E-01
x = 204.0000 p = 1.048E-01 r = 2.673E-05 y =-1.001E-04
Q =-3.109E-01 M =-1.505E-01 V =-2.775E-02
x = 206.0000 p = 5.898E-02 r = 1.716E-05 y =-5.634E-05
Q =-1.996E-01 M =-1.429E-01 V = 2.140E-02
x = 208.0000 p = 3.129E-02 r = 9.795E-06 y =-2.988E-05
Q =-1.139E-01 M =-9.472E-02 V = 2.340E-02
x = 212.0000 p = 7.944E-03 r = 2.691E-06 y =-7.587E-06
Q =-3.130E-02 M =-2.965E-02 V = 9.507E-03
x = 216.0000 p = 1.860E-03 r = 6.572E-07 y =-1.777E-06
Q =-7.644E-03 M =-7.684E-03 V = 2.698E-03
x = 220.0000 p = 4.149E-04 r = 1.505E-07 y =-3.963E-07
Q =-1.750E-03 M =-1.820E-03 V = 6.692E-04
x = 230.0000 p = 8.615E-06 r = 3.238E-09 y =-8.228E-09
Q =-3.766E-05 M =-4.092E-05 V = 1.589E-05
14/11/11 Page 28
7.1.1.4 Super-Critical Pasternak Model
This example is based on a flat 0.1049m thick pavement slab having the flexural rigidity EI = 2.020 MNm
2
.
Beam : L = 400.0000 EI= 2.020E+03 u = 0.0000
[ ]
000 . 4
300 . 0
600 . 0
m 600 . 0
020 . 2 4
047 . 1
2
1
4

,
_

x = 200.0000 p = 2.684E-01 r =-8.910E-72 y =-2.563E-04
Q = 1.036E-67 M = 3.727E-01 V =-1.000E+00
x = 202.0000 p = 1.676E-01 r = 4.774E-05 y =-1.600E-04
Q =-5.552E-01 M =-2.598E-02 V = 2.616E-04
x = 204.0000 p = 9.168E-02 r = 2.648E-05 y =-8.757E-05
Q =-3.080E-01 M =-1.615E-02 V = 4.820E-03
x = 206.0000 p = 5.007E-02 r = 1.446E-05 y =-4.783E-05
Q =-1.682E-01 M =-8.837E-03 V = 2.672E-03
x = 208.0000 p = 2.735E-02 r = 7.900E-06 y =-2.612E-05
Q =-9.187E-02 M =-4.826E-03 V = 1.460E-03
x = 212.0000 p = 8.156E-03 r = 2.356E-06 y =-7.790E-06
Q =-2.740E-02 M =-1.439E-03 V = 4.354E-04
x = 216.0000 p = 2.433E-03 r = 7.027E-07 y =-2.323E-06
Q =-8.172E-03 M =-4.293E-04 V = 1.299E-04
x = 220.0000 p = 7.255E-04 r = 2.096E-07 y =-6.929E-07
Q =-2.437E-03 M =-1.280E-04 V = 3.873E-05
x = 230.0000 p = 3.524E-05 r = 1.018E-08 y =-3.366E-08
Q =-1.184E-04 M =-6.220E-06 V = 1.881E-06
14/11/11 Page 29
Figure 7-1 Vertical Displacement Along the Infinite Beam [from Ref./ 3/]
Figure 7-2 Rotation Along the Infinite Beam [from Ref./ 3/]
14/11/11 Page 30
Figure 7-3 Bending Moment Along the Infinite Beam [from Ref./ 3/]
Figure 7-4 Shear Resultant in the Soil & Beam Model [from Ref./ 3/]
14/11/11 Page 31
Figure 7-5 Shear Force in the Infinite Beam [from Ref./ 3/]
Figure 7-6 Shear Force in the Soil Layer [from Ref./3/]
14/11/11 Page 32
7.1.2 Uniform Load
The runs in this Section reproduce the configuration presented in Ref./ 5/ of an infinitely long concrete beam
resting on a two-parameter Pasternak foundation and subjected to a patch load of 200 KN uniformly distributed
over a distance of 200mm.
The soil is characterized by its subgrade reaction modulus k = 100 MN/m
3
.
The flexural rigidity of the rectangular concrete beam is 33 . 13
12
3

BH
E EI
c
[MNm
2
]
where
20000
c
E [MPa] Youngs modulus of concrete
0 . 1 B [m] width of the rectangular concrete section
200 . 0 H [m] depth of the rectangular concrete section
The beam is given an arbitrary length of 400m, the load being centered 200m from either extremity.
Figure 7-7 Infinite Beam on Pasternak Foundation [from Ref./5/]
Beam : L = 400.0000 EI= 1.333E+04 u = 0.0000
right He= 0.000E+00 Ke= 0.000E+00 Je= 0.000E+00
1 Distributed Loads
a = 199.9000 Qa= 1.000E+03 b = 200.1000 Qb= 1.000E+03
14/11/11 Page 33
The forces and deformations in the beam are computed in sections at 0mm, 500mm and 1000mm from the
centerline of load application for a shear stiffness modulus equal to G = 10 MN/m.
x = 200.0000 p = 8.978E+01 r =-1.985E-21 y =-8.978E-04
Q = 9.925E-17 M = 2.826E+01 V = 1.171E-15
x = 200.5000 p = 7.136E+01 r = 5.636E-04 y =-7.136E-04
Q =-2.818E+01 M = 3.229E+00 V =-3.039E+01
x = 201.0000 p = 4.356E+01 r = 5.020E-04 y =-4.356E-04
Q =-2.510E+01 M =-4.425E+00 V =-4.885E+00
The computer printouts match exactly the figures shown in Table 13.1 of Ref./ 5/ for shear stiffness moduli G
respectively equal to 0.0 (Winkler), 10 and 50 MN/m.
G [MN/m] Section x [m] BEAMPASK Ref./5/
y [mm] -1.165 -1.17
M [KN/m] 37.92 37.923
V [KN] 0. 0.
200.0
Q [KN] 0. 0.
y [mm] -0.9026 -0.90
M [KN/m] 6.846 6.848
V [KN] -46.58 -47.
200.5
Q [KN] 0. 0.
y [mm] -0.4768 -0.48
M [KN/m] -6.959 -6.959
V [KN] -12.23 -12.
0.0
201.0
Q [KN] 0. 0.
y [mm] -1.093 -1.09
M [KN/m] 35.30 35.303
V [KN] 0. 0.
200.0
Q [KN] 0. 0.
y [mm] -0.8517 -0.85
M [KN/m] 5.780 5.781
V [KN] -42.21 -42.
200.5
Q [KN] -7.610 -8.
y [mm] -0.4675 -0.47
M [KN/m] -6.271 -6.271
V [KN] -9.967 -10.
10.0
201.0
Q [KN] -7.016 -7.
14/11/11 Page 34
y [mm] -0.8978 -0.90
M [KN/m] 28.26 28.621
V [KN] 0. 0.
200.0
Q [KN] 0. 0.
y [mm] -0.7136 -0.71
M [KN/m] 3.229 3.230
V [KN] -30.39 -30.
200.5
Q [KN] -28.18 -28.
y [mm] -0.4356 -0.44
M [KN/m] -4.425 -4.425
V [KN] -4.885 -5.
50.0
201.0
Q [KN] -25.10 -25.
7.2 Semi-Infinite Beam
The runs in this Section reproduce the configuration presented in Ref./ 5/ of an semi-infinite concrete beam resting
on a two-parameter Pasternak foundation in most aspects identical to the model previously investigated in Section
7.1.2.
The beam is given an arbitrary length of 200m and is subjected to a patch load of 200 KN uniformly distributed
between 900mm and 1100mm from the free extremity at its right.
Figure 7-8 Semi-Infinite Beam on a Pasternak Foundation [from Ref./ 5/]
Beam : L = 200.0000 EI= 1.333E+04 u = 1.0000
right He= 0.000E+00 Ke= 0.000E+00 Je= 0.000E+00
1 Distributed Loads
14/11/11 Page 35
a = 198.9000 Qa= 1.000E+03 b = 199.1000 Qb= 1.000E+03
The forces and deformations in the beam are computed at sections located 1000mm, 500mm and 0mm from the
right free edge of the beam for a 100% deflection ratio and a shear stiffness modulus equal to G = 50 MN/m.
x = 199.0000 p = 9.104E+01 r =-7.806E-07 y =-9.104E-04
Q = 3.903E-02 M = 2.869E+01 V = 1.328E+00
x = 199.5000 p = 7.198E+01 r = 5.970E-04 y =-7.198E-04
Q =-2.985E+01 M = 4.805E+00 V =-2.681E+01
x = 200.0000 p = 4.033E+01 r = 6.404E-04 y =-4.033E-04
Q =-3.202E+01 M =-6.969E-12 V = 3.505E+00
7.2.1 Winkler Foundation
The computer printouts match exactly the figures shown in Table 13.2 of Ref./ 5/ irrespective of the deflection
ratio when the shear stiffness modulus G is equal to 0.0 (Winkler).
u [-] G [MN/m] Section x [m] BEAMPASK Ref./5/
y [mm] -1.231 -1.23
M [KN/m] 37.77 37.767
V [KN] 2.639 3.
199.0
Q [KN] 0. 0.
y [mm] -1.006 -1.01
M [KN/m] 9.004 9.005
V [KN] -39.65 -40.
199.5
Q [KN] 0. 0.
y [mm] -0.5725 -0.57
M [KN/m] 0. 0.
V [KN] 0. 0.
any 0.0
200.0
Q [KN] 0. 0.
14/11/11 Page 36
7.2.2 0% Deflection Ratio
The computer printouts match reasonably well the figures shown in Table 13.2 of Ref./ 5/ for a deflection ratio of
0% and shear stiffness moduli G respectively equal to 10 and 50 MN/m.
y [mm] -1.170 -1.17
M [KN/m] 34.06 33.848
V [KN] 1.374 1.
199.0
Q [KN] 1.222 1.
y [mm] -0.9981 -1.01
M [KN/m] 6.394 6.159
V [KN] -35.48 -35.
199.5
Q [KN] -6.189 -7.
y [mm] -0.6654 -0.69
M [KN/m] 0. 0.
V [KN] 6.730 7.
0.0 10.0
200.0
Q [KN] -6.730 -7.
y [mm] -1.020 -1.00
M [KN/m] 26.24 26.304
V [KN] -0.3066 -1.
199.0
Q [KN] 7.991 8.
y [mm] -0.9336 -0.91
M [KN/m] 2.040 2.115
V [KN] -25.68 -29.
199.5
Q [KN] -16.80 -15.
y [mm] -0.7688 -0.76
M [KN/m] 0. 0.
V [KN] 15.54 8.
0.0 50.0
200.0
Q [KN] -15.54 -8.
The BEAMPASKresults are corroborated by computing the shear force at the beam edge in the inner Pasternak
layer from the slope of the beam under the condition u = 0.0 and G = 50 MN/m
BEAMPASK 54 . 15 48 . 16
0 . 500
9336 . 0 7688 . 0
00 . 1 10 5
4

+

dx
dy
GB Q [KN]
Ref./5/ 0 . 8 0 . 15
0 . 500
91 . 0 76 . 0
00 . 1 10 5
4

+
Q [KN]
14/11/11 Page 37
y [mm] -1.144 -1.17
M [KN/m] 35.54 34.162
V [KN] 2.372 1.
199.0
Q [KN] 0.4874 1.
y [mm] -0.9199 -0.99
M [KN/m] 8.002 6.501
V [KN] -36.37 -36.
199.5
Q [KN] -7.530 -7.
y [mm] -0.5080 -0.65
M [KN/m] 0. 0.
V [KN] 0.4241 6.
0.5 10.0
200.0
Q [KN] -8.457 -8.
y [mm] -0.9480 -0.95
M [KN/m] 27.84 27.728
V [KN] 0.7653 0.
199.0
Q [KN] 2.775 4.
y [mm] -0.7933 -0.80
M [KN/m] 3.854 3.722
V [KN] -26.43 -28.
199.5
Q [KN] -25.36 -21.
y [mm] -0.5290 -0.56
M [KN/m] 0. 0.
V [KN] 7.645 4.
0.5 50.0
200.0
Q [KN] -26.35 -18.
The BEAMPASKresults are corroborated by computing the shear force at the beam edge in the inner Pasternak
layer from the slope of the beam under the condition u = 0.50 and G = 50 MN/m
BEAMPASK 35 . 26 43 . 26
0 . 500
7933 . 0 5290 . 0
00 . 1 10 5
4

+

dx
dy
GB Q [KN]
Ref./5/ 0 . 18 0 . 24
0 . 500
80 . 0 56 . 0
00 . 1 10 5
4

+
Q [KN]
The equilibrium of shear forces at the beam edge is satisfied since
0 002 . 0 10 5290 . 0 10 0 . 5 10 0 . 1 00 . 1 5 . 0 35 . 26 645 . 7
3 4 5
+ + +

y kG uB Q V
14/11/11 Page 38
y [mm] -1.127 -1.16
M [KN/m] 36.45 34.446
V [KN] 2.988 2.
199.0
Q [KN] 0.03383 1.
y [mm] -0.8716 -0.97
M [KN/m] 8.994 6.811
V [KN] -36.92 -35.
199.5
Q [KN] -8.358 -7.
y [mm] -0.4109 -0.62
M [KN/m] 0. 0.
V [KN] -3.470 5.
1.0 10.0
200.0
Q [KN] -9.523 -8.
y [mm] -0.9104 -0.92
M [KN/m] 28.69 28.562
V [KN] 1.328 1.
199.0
Q [KN] 0.03903 2.
y [mm] -0.7198 -0.74
M [KN/m] 4.805 4.663
V [KN] -26.81 -28.
199.5
Q [KN] -29.85 -25.
y [mm] -0.4033 -0.44
M [KN/m] 0. 0.
V [KN] 3.505 2.
1.0 50.0
200.0
Q [KN] -32.02 -26.
The equilibrium of shear forces at the beam edge is satisfied for G = 50 MN/m since
0 003 . 0 10 4033 . 0 10 0 . 5 10 0 . 1 00 . 1 0 . 1 02 . 32 505 . 3
3 4 5
+ + +

y kG uB Q V
14/11/11 Page 39
7.3 Finite Beam
7.3.1 Centrally Loaded Beam
The run of this Section is based on the example in Ref./ 2/ of a 10m long 500mm high 1000mm high beam
resting on an elastic foundation and loaded at its center by a vertical 100 KN force. The Youngs modulus of the
beam material is assumed equal to 36050 MPa.
The modulus of subgrade reaction and the shear modulus of the soil are set equal to k = 10 MN/m
3
and G = 7
MN/m respectively.
Beam : L = 10.0000 EI= 3.755E+05 u = 0.0000
right He= 0.000E+00 Ke= 0.000E+00 Je= 0.000E+00
d = 5.0000 P = 1.000E+02
0 Distributed Loads
x = 5.0000 p = 1.507E+01 r =-9.688E-21 y =-1.507E-03
Q = 6.781E-17 M = 8.927E+01 V =-5.000E+01
The computed moment and deflection at the center of the beam corroborate exactly the analytically predicted
figures in Ref./2/.
Section x [m] BEAMPASK Ref./2/
y [mm] -1.507 -1.506813
5.0
M [KN/m] 89.27 89.27447
7.3.2 Beam Loaded at its Edges
The runs in this Section are based on the example in Ref./ 4/ of a rectangular concrete beam resting on an elastic
foundation and loaded by a pair of vertical 300 KN forces at its two extremities.
The ratio of the maximum bending moment in the beam on a Pasternak foundation is computed by reference to
the simpler Winkler model, and its sensitivity assessed as a function of the different parameters
14/11/11 Page 40
Subgrade reaction modulus: k varied from 300 to 500, 700, 1000 and 1200 MN/m
3
.
Cross section rigidity: height of the beam H is varied from 400 to 1000mm by steps of 200mm,
Beam length: L increased from 2.0m to 5.0m by steps of 1.0m,
The width of the concrete beam is set constant equal to B = 400 mm, and the Youngs modulus of the beam
material is assumed equal to 24000 MPa in all cases.
Figure 7-9 Finite Beam on a Pasternak Foundation [from Ref./4/]
The runs presented below comply with the set of parameters k = 300 MN/m
3
G = 0.35k = 105 MN/m
H = 400 mm (EI = 51.2 MN*m
2
)
(Case A-I1-L1) L = 2.000 m
Beam : L = 2.0000 EI= 5.120E+04 u = 0.0000
right He= 0.000E+00 Ke= 0.000E+00 Je= 0.000E+00
d = 0.0001 P = 3.000E+02
d = 1.9999 P = 3.000E+02
0 Distributed Loads
The printout corresponds to zero deflection ratio (u = 0).
x = 0.0000 p = 3.668E+02 r = 1.403E-03 y =-3.057E-03
Q =-5.894E+01 M = 2.102E-12 V = 5.894E+01
14/11/11 Page 41
x = 0.1000 p = 3.500E+02 r = 1.381E-03 y =-2.917E-03
Q =-5.800E+01 M =-2.230E+01 V =-2.062E+02
x = 0.2000 p = 3.338E+02 r = 1.318E-03 y =-2.782E-03
Q =-5.537E+01 M =-4.131E+01 V =-1.746E+02
x = 0.3000 p = 3.185E+02 r = 1.221E-03 y =-2.654E-03
Q =-5.130E+01 M =-5.732E+01 V =-1.461E+02
x = 0.4000 p = 3.046E+02 r = 1.096E-03 y =-2.538E-03
Q =-4.604E+01 M =-7.062E+01 V =-1.202E+02
x = 0.5000 p = 2.923E+02 r = 9.473E-04 y =-2.436E-03
Q =-3.978E+01 M =-8.144E+01 V =-9.661E+01
x = 0.6000 p = 2.819E+02 r = 7.795E-04 y =-2.350E-03
Q =-3.274E+01 M =-9.000E+01 V =-7.496E+01
x = 0.7000 p = 2.737E+02 r = 5.970E-04 y =-2.281E-03
Q =-2.508E+01 M =-9.648E+01 V =-5.485E+01
x = 0.8000 p = 2.677E+02 r = 4.039E-04 y =-2.231E-03
Q =-1.696E+01 M =-1.010E+02 V =-3.592E+01
x = 0.9000 p = 2.640E+02 r = 2.037E-04 y =-2.200E-03
Q =-8.554E+00 M =-1.037E+02 V =-1.777E+01
x = 1.0000 p = 2.628E+02 r =-1.355E-22 y =-2.190E-03
Q = 5.693E-18 M =-1.046E+02 V =-5.358E-16
The Table below compares the moment at the middle of the beam for different deflection ratios with reference to
the Winkler model
u [-] G [MN/m] M [KN*m]
any 0.0 138.2
0.0 104.6
0.5 105.0 76.80
1.0 60.68
The ratio of moments at midspan of the beam 757 . 0
2 . 138
6 . 104
439 . 0
2 . 138
68 . 60

Wink
Pask
M
M
is indicative of a more drastic reduction due to the Pasternak layer compared to the mere 12% decrease predicted
by Ref./ 4/.
14/11/11 Page 42
Figure 7-10 Relative Moment as a Function of Beam Flexural Rigidity [from Ref./ 4/]
Figure 7-11 Relative Moment as a Function of Subgrade Reaction Modulus [from Ref./ 4/]
14/11/11 Page 43
7.4 Finite Beam Equivalent to an Infinite Strip
The infinite beam subjected to a point load of 2.0 KN which is investigated in Section 7.1.1.2 is shortened to only
14m, the two removed semi-infinite portions being replaced by equivalent stiffness matrices computed in
accordance with Section 4.4.2.
[ ]
[ ]
1
1
m 1677 . 0 250 . 0 1 150 . 0
m 150 . 0
thus
1
]
1
t
t
5 4
4 3
10 734 . 1 10 327 . 2
10 327 . 2 10 803 . 7
K [KN, m]
The displacement ratio must under this configuration be set to zero (u = 0).
Beam : L = 14.0000 EI= 5.170E+05 u = 0.0000
Supports : left Ho= 7.803E+03 Ko= 1.734E+05 Jo=-2.327E+04
right He= 7.803E+03 Ke= 1.734E+05 Je= 2.327E+04
It can be observed that the diagrams of forces and displacements are totally independent of the position of the
loading with respect to the extremities of the beam, and remain rigorously identical to those computed in Section
7.1.1.2 at the same distance from the concentrated load.
7.4.1 Concentrated Load at 1.0m from Right Support
d = 1.0000 P = 2.000E+00
0 Distributed Loads
x = 1.0000 p = 1.342E-01 r =-1.014E-09 y =-1.282E-04
Q = 1.179E-05 M = 2.982E+00 V =-1.000E+00
x = 3.0000 p = 1.245E-01 r = 8.154E-06 y =-1.190E-04
Q =-9.484E-02 M = 1.353E+00 V =-6.437E-01
x = 5.0000 p = 1.035E-01 r = 1.127E-05 y =-9.888E-05
Q =-1.311E-01 M = 3.461E-01 V =-3.783E-01
x = 7.0000 p = 7.941E-02 r = 1.141E-05 y =-7.584E-05
Q =-1.327E-01 M =-2.137E-01 V =-1.937E-01
14/11/11 Page 44
x = 9.0000 p = 5.682E-02 r = 1.000E-05 y =-5.426E-05
Q =-1.163E-01 M =-4.723E-01 V =-7.433E-02
x = 13.0000 p = 2.337E-02 r = 5.933E-06 y =-2.232E-05
Q =-6.901E-02 M =-5.096E-01 V = 3.294E-02
d = 5.0000 P = 2.000E+00
0 Distributed Loads
x = 1.0000 p = 1.035E-01 r =-1.127E-05 y =-9.888E-05
Q = 1.311E-01 M = 3.462E-01 V = 3.782E-01
x = 3.0000 p = 1.245E-01 r =-8.155E-06 y =-1.190E-04
Q = 9.484E-02 M = 1.353E+00 V = 6.436E-01
x = 5.0000 p = 1.342E-01 r = 1.463E-10 y =-1.282E-04
Q =-1.701E-06 M = 2.981E+00 V =-1.000E+00
x = 7.0000 p = 1.245E-01 r = 8.155E-06 y =-1.190E-04
Q =-9.484E-02 M = 1.353E+00 V =-6.436E-01
x = 9.0000 p = 1.035E-01 r = 1.127E-05 y =-9.888E-05
Q =-1.311E-01 M = 3.460E-01 V =-3.783E-01
x = 11.0000 p = 7.941E-02 r = 1.141E-05 y =-7.584E-05
Q =-1.327E-01 M =-2.137E-01 V =-1.937E-01
x = 13.0000 p = 5.682E-02 r = 1.000E-05 y =-5.426E-05
Q =-1.164E-01 M =-4.722E-01 V =-7.428E-02
d = 7.0000 P = 2.000E+00
14/11/11 Page 45
0 Distributed Loads
x = 1.0000 p = 7.941E-02 r =-1.141E-05 y =-7.584E-05
Q = 1.327E-01 M =-2.136E-01 V = 1.936E-01
x = 3.0000 p = 1.035E-01 r =-1.127E-05 y =-9.888E-05
Q = 1.311E-01 M = 3.461E-01 V = 3.782E-01
x = 5.0000 p = 1.245E-01 r =-8.155E-06 y =-1.190E-04
Q = 9.484E-02 M = 1.353E+00 V = 6.436E-01
x = 7.0000 p = 1.342E-01 r =-1.145E-25 y =-1.282E-04
Q = 1.332E-21 M = 2.981E+00 V =-1.000E+00
x = 9.0000 p = 1.245E-01 r = 8.155E-06 y =-1.190E-04
Q =-9.484E-02 M = 1.353E+00 V =-6.436E-01
x = 11.0000 p = 1.035E-01 r = 1.127E-05 y =-9.888E-05
Q =-1.311E-01 M = 3.461E-01 V =-3.782E-01
x = 13.0000 p = 7.941E-02 r = 1.141E-05 y =-7.584E-05
Q =-1.327E-01 M =-2.136E-01 V =-1.936E-01

BEAMPASK

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

BEAMPASK

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

BEAMPASK

Finite Length Beam on a Continuous Pasternak Support

is transformed to the characteristic equation 0 4 4

r rotation of section x rad

Forces and Displacements along the Beam

Forces and Displacements along the Beam

Forces and Displacements along the Beam

Forces and Displacements along the Beam

You might also like