COMPARATIVE NUMERICAL BUCKLING

ANALYSIS OF COLUMNS OF VARIABLE

MOMENT OF INERTIA

BY

ERUEMULOR, Faithful Uzor

2007/1/28125EC

A PROJECT SUBMITTED TO THE DEPARTMENT OF CIVIL

ENGINEERING FEDERAL UNIVERSITY OF TECHNOLOGY,
MINNA.

IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENT FOR

THE AWARD OF A BACHELOR OF ENGINEERING (B. ENG)
DEGREE

OCTOBER, 2012.
DECLARATION
I, ERUEMULOR Faithful Uzor (2007/1/28125EC) hereby declare that this project work

Comparative Numerical Buckling Analysis of Columns of Variable Moments of Inertia was

solely carried out by me under the supervision of professor S. Sadiku, Dean of engineering,

Federal University of Technology, Minna, Niger State.

.. .
ERUEMULOR Faithful Uzor DATE

CERTIFICATION

2
I, ERUEMULOR Faithful Uzor hereby certify that this work titled Comparative Numerical

Buckling Analysis of Columns of Variable Moments of Inertia submitted for the degree in

Engineering is the result of my own study and investigation. Wherever possible I acknowledge

the authors of references used and views expressed other than my own.

.. .
Prof. S. Sadiku Date
PROJECT SUPERVISOR

.. .
Dr. M. Abdullahi Date
HEAD OF DEPARTMENT

.. .
EXTERNAL SUPERVISOR Date

DEDICATION

3
This project is dedicated to my Almighty God who saw me through, and to my beloved parents

Mr and Mrs Eruemulor who supported and encouraged me in every way and my guardians

Mummy and Daddy Odigure, God bless you. Finally I dedicate this project to my siblings,

Chibuzor, Stanley, Ebube, Mercy, and Efe.

4
 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

I want to give my profound gratitude to the Almighty God for seeing me through. My sincere

appreciation goes to my supervisor Engr Professor S. Sadiku, Dean of engineering who went

through every line, giving advice and necessary corrections.

I am also appreciative of the effort of my Parents Mr and Mrs Eruemulor for their love and

financial support throughout my project. I also thank Mummy and Daddy Odigure for their full

support.

To my beloved siblings Chibuzor, Stanley, Ebube, Mercy and Efe.

I would also like to acknowledge the Head of department of Civil Engineering Enrg Dr. M.

Abdullahi, Engr Dr. Ndoke, Engr Dr. Aguwa, Engr Mustapha, Engr Ibrahim Abdulkadir, Engr

Dr. Amadi Engr, Olayemi James, Engr Richard for all their contributions to my Education.

I also sincerely appreciate my course mates Dorcas, Happiness, Seun, Lucy, Alfiya, Queen,

Abdulmalik, Abdul, Harphyz, Victor , Chris, Reuben, Galadima, for their support through out the

duration of my project and school.

5
 ABSTRACT

The project work is on the Comparative Numerical Buckling Analysis of Columns of Variable
Moments of Inertia. The finite difference and finite element method is such that the columns
were discretised into several elements with each element having different moment of inertia. The
equation was applied at each node and the equations obtained was transformed into a tri diagonal
matrix with an unknown p (buckling load), the size of which depends on the number of nodes
and the boundary conditions.

6
 TABLE OF CONTENTS

Title Page i

Declaration ii

Certification iii

Dedication iv

Acknowledgements v

Table of Contents vi

Abstract Vii

CHAPTER ONE

1.0 Introduction 1

1.1 Aims and Objectives 3

1.2 Scope of Studies 3

1.3 Justification 4

CHAPTER TWO

2.0 Literature review 5

2.1 Historical background 5

2.2 Columns 6

2.3 Buckling 7

2.3.1 Three ways a compression member can buckle 9

2.3.3 Flexural buckling 10

2.3.3 Torsional buckling 10

7
2.3.4 Flexural Torsional buckling 10

2.4 Finite Difference 11

2.5 Finite Element Method 12

CHAPTER THREE

3.0 Methodology 15

3.1 Finite difference method 15

3.2 Finite element method 19

CHAPTER FOUR

4.0 Result and Discussion of results 22

CHAPTER FIVE

5.0 Conclusion and Recommendation 32

5.1 Conclusion 32

5.2 Recommendation 32

REFERENCE 33

8
 CHAPTER ONE

1.0 INTRODUCTION

In modern generation buildings in this country, there is now an extensive use of non-uniform

(non-prismatic) columns, a number of which exact values of the buckling loads are not available

(not easy to compute the buckling loads) using the Euler formula. But, it is imperative on the

analyst/designer to have an idea of the buckling loads of the columns to avoid buckling failure.

Therefore, this project addresses the problem of identifying suitable numerical tools for the

computation of buckling loads of non-uniform columns.

It is pertinent however to mention that quite a number of numerical methods are available in the

literature on structural stability, examples of which are finite difference, finite element, New

marks numerical scheme.

In this project, these various methods shall be examined for purposes of establishing the

comparative advantage for the different cases (columns) under consideration.

Buckling has become more of a problem in recent years since the use of high strength material

requires less material for load support-structures and components have become generally more

slender and buckle-prone. A structure is therefore said to buckle when it undergoes visibly large

displacement transverse to the load. Buckling is similar to bending, thus the shape of the cross-

section is very important. The load at which a column will begin to buckle is known as the

critical buckling load. The buckling length of a column depends on its physical length and its end

conditions.

A structure may fail to support its load when a connection snaps or it bends until it is useless, or

a member in tension either pulls apart or a crack forms that divide it or a member in compression

crushes and crumbles or finally, if a member in compression buckles, that is, moves laterally and

1
shorten under load it can no longer support. Of all these models of failure, buckling is probably

the most catastrophic.

This mode of failure which can also be described as failure due to elastic instability can occur

when the actual compressive stressed at failure are smaller than the ultimate compressive stresses

that the column in capable of withstanding. The constitutive material and the geometric shape are

the main properties that make a structure withstand loads and thus every structure is design with

a specific shape and it is expected that it should retain this shape during its service life.

The effort required to compute the buckling load on non-uniform columns can be enormous.

Non-uniforms columns are columns with variable section. A short column under the action of an

axial load will fail by direct compression before it buckles, but a long column loaded in the same

manner will fail by buckling (bending), the buckling effect being so large that the effect of the

direct load may be neglected. The buckling load causes the column to be in a state of unstable

equilibrium and is directly proportional to the second moment of area of the cross-section.

1.1 AIMS AND OBJECTIVES

Aims:

The aim of the project is to examine non-uniform columns with commonly encountered

geometries using different numerical methods and comparing their efficiencies.

Objective:

The objectives behind this study are:

(1) to calculate the buckling loads of non-uniform/non-standard columns.

(2) to present and illustrate the application of numerical methods which can be used to

compute the buckling loads on non-uniform columns (that is columns with varying I -

section).

2
1.2 SCOPE OF STUDY

There are several methods of computing buckling loads. This study will focus on the method of

computing this load on non-uniform column using finite difference method and finite element

method.

Other methods of determining buckling loads are the perturbation method, new marks method

and the Vianellos method.

1.3 JUSTIFICATION

It is generally known that computation of buckling load on uniform column (column with

constant EI) is quite straight forward and only requires the Euler

buckling value 2 EI, where I is the length of the member. For columns with variable
L2

Sections or with intermediate axial loads, the analytical solution of the above equation can

become difficult. This is why we are using numerical method like the finite difference and finite

element method to establish the buckling load of such columns.

3
 CHAPTER TWO

2.0 LITERATURE REVIEW

2.1 HISTORICAL BACKGROUND

The first investigation of the buckling of columns under axial compression goes back about two

centuries to Euler and his study of the elastic. While the initial investigation of necking of bars

are already more than a century old. In the early years, columns were designed empirically and

their ultimate strength was determined entirely by the crushing strength of the material similar to

that of the fracture strength in tension.

It was vaguely understood that column strength is somehow related to the column length. Van

Musshen Broek (1729) first recognized this and presented an empirical formula for column

strength in terms of column length; L. Euler (1759) was the first to derive the Euler column

formula and proved theoretically that there is another criterion for a column strength which is

independent of crushing or yielding of materials. In this early development, the column behavior

is analyzed by using the linear theory based on linear elastic material properly and small

deflection approximation of the column. Amba Rao (1967) is one of many authors who have

shown that in the presence of a compressive axial load the natural frequency of a beam reduces

and finally becomes zero when the critical Euler buckling load is reduced. Euler developments of

columns and beam-columns have been received by Bleich (1952) and Timoshenko (1953).

Elastic beam-columns were solved by Timoshenko and Gere (1961), Thompson and Hunt (1973)

and many others for various end conditions. (Saha and Banu, 2007).

2.2 COLUMNS

4
These are structural members that carry loads chiefly in compression. Although some may be

subjected to bending either due to their slenderness or due to asymmetrical loading from beams.

In a structure they carry the loads from the beams and slabs down to the foundation. They are

generally referred to as compression members, because the compression forces dominate their

behavior. (Khurmi, 2005).

Concrete columns may be unreinforced or they may be reinforced with longitudinal bars and

(ties columns) or with longitudinal bars and spiral steel (spiral-reinforced columns). Sometimes

the columns may be a composite of structural steel of cast iron and concrete columns are seldom

used because of transverse tensile tresses and the possibility of longitudinal tensile stresses being

induced by buckling or unanticipated bending. Concrete is weak in tension, such stresses are

generally avoided. When plain concrete columns are used, they usually are limited in height to

five or six times the least thickness. Under axial loading, the load divided by the cross-sectional

area of the concrete should not exceed the allowable unit compressive stress for the concrete.

These are the vertical load bearing members of the structural frame which transmits the beam

loads down to the foundations. They are usually constructed in storey heights and therefore the

reinforcement must be lapped to provide structural continuity. (Chudley and Greeno, 2006).

Columns are limited in strength by instability or buckling which itself depends on a large

number of factors such as the type of load, material properties, end-conditions, member length

and shape, imperfections in shapes and material, residual stresses, etc. naturally it is difficult to

take into account all these variable in any analysis. (Raz, 2002).

2.3 BUCKLING

This is a failure mode characterized by a sudden failure of a structural member subjected to high

compressive stresses, where the actual compressive stresses at failure are smaller than the

5
ultimate compressive stresses that the material is capable of withstanding. This mode of failure is

also described as failure due to elastic instability. (Lindberg and Florence, 1987).

This is a special mode of instability of equilibrium which may occur in deformable bodies

subjected mostly to compressive loading. So far as the structural problems are concerned an

existing state of equilibrium or trend of behavior of the structure subjected to applied loading and

/ or temperature variations could be altered and the structure could acquire a new equilibrium

state or a new trend of behavior. This is termed the buckling of that particular structure. A well

known example of elastic buckling instability is the flexural buckling of an axially compressed

slender elastic column subjected to a concentric compressive force. (Farshad, 1992).

One of the salient features of static elastic instability that is buckling is the bifurcation of

equilibrium state. At a certain stage of loading, the state of equilibrium of a structure may reach a

point of bifurcation in which these are two possible states of equilibrium. The intersection of

these two paths corresponds to the bifurcation of equilibrium because at such point two state of

equilibrium can exist for the same load. Beyond the bifurcation point, the system can have one of

the two choices of behavior. It can stay in its initial equilibrium regime or it could diverge from

the primary path and follow a new path, the secondary path of deformation. From the physical

point of view, the structure chooses the path corresponding to a minimum of total energy of

system.

The bifurcation point of an equilibrium state marks the critical state of behavior of an elastic

system. The primary path, which is the initial state of equilibrium beyond the bifurcation point, is

an unstable path while the secondary equilibrium path is stable. The loading condition

corresponding to a bifurcation point is called the critical Load.

6
Considering a straight slender elastic strength column subjected of axial compressive force. If the

force retains its original direction, then it is conservative. Under the applied compressive force,

this column would first undergo axial shortening; the amount of axial shortening is linearly

proportional to the applied force. This trend of behavior that is axial shortening of an otherwise

straight column is called primary path of equilibrium of the column is further compressed but

still remains its straight configuration until the so called bifurcation point is reached. A certain

value of axially applied force would mark the bifurcation point.

With further increase in the applied force, beyond the bifurcation point, the column can fellow

one of the two following path;

(1) It can remain straight and undergo further pure axial contraction. (Farshad, 1992)

(2) Acquire a bent form and undergo lateral as well as axial deformation. This bent

equilibrium state is certainly a new trend of behavior that is different from its straight

configuration. This bent form of the compressed column is called buckling. The straight

form of equilibrium, beyond the bifurcation point is unstable in the sense that a small

perturbation could alter the straight configuration and bring the column to a bent position.

Primary Path
Load (Unstable)
Secondary Path
(Stable)

Pcr

Axial
Shortening
Fig 1 Behavior of axially compressed elastic column

2.3.1 THREE WAYS A COMPRESSION MEMBER CAN BUCKLE

7
- Flexural Buckling
- Torsional Buckling
- Flexural-torsional Buckling

2.3.2 FLEXURAL BUCKLING

This type of buckling occurs in any compression member that experiences a deflection caused by

bending or flexure. Flexural buckling occurs about the axis with the largest slenderness ratio, and

the smallest radius of gyration. Braces constrained against flexural buckling use buckling

stiffeners. Flexural buckling can be calculated according to Euro code 3-1-1 (www.eurocode-

resources.com).

2.3.3 TORSIONAL BUCKLING:

This type of buckling only occurs in compression members that are doubly- symmetric and have

very slender cross sectional elements. It is caused by a turning about the longitudinal axis.

Torsional buckling occurs mostly in built ups sections, and almost never in rolled sections.

Torsional buckling can be calculated according to Euro code 3-1-1. Torsional buckling of

columns can arise when a section compression is very weak in torsion and leads to the columns

rotation about the force axis.

2.3.4 FLEXURAL TORSIONAL BUCKLING:

This type of buckling only occurs in compression members that have unsymmetrical cross-

section with one axis of symmetry. Flexural-torsional buckling is the simultaneous bending and

twisting of a member. This mostly occurs in channels, structural tees, double- angles shapes and

equal-leg single angles. It can also be calculated according to Euro code 3-1-1. (www.erocode-

resources.com).

8
2.4 FINITE DIFFERENCE

A numerical solution of the differential equation for displacement is obtained for chosen points

on the structure referred to as nodes or pivotal points or simply as points of division. The

numerical solution is thus obtained from differential equations which are applicable to actual

continuous structure. This is different from the finite element method, in which the actual

continuous structure is idealized into an assembly of discrete elements for which force-

displacement relations and stress distribution are determined and the complete solution is

obtained by combining the individual elements into an idealized structure for which the

conditions of equilibrium and compatibility are satisfied at the junction of these element. (Ghali

and Neville, 1989).

The numerical solution by finite difference generally requires replacing the derivations of

a function by different expressions of the functions at the nodes. The differential equation

governing the displacement is applied in a different form at each node, relating the displacement

at the given node in its vicinity to the external applied load. This usually provides a sufficient

number of simultaneous equations for the displacement to be determined. The finite difference

coefficients of the equation applied at nodes on or close to the boundary have to be modified

compared with the coefficients used at interior points in order to satisfy the boundary conditions

of the problem. There in lies one of the difficulties of the method of finite differences and a

disadvantage in its use compared with the finite element method.

Nevertheless, the finite difference method can be conveniently used for a variety of

problems and when if is used, the number of simultaneous equation requires is generally only

about a half a third of the number of the equations needed in the finite-element method.

9
 Finite difference expression can be obtained by considering forward, central or

backward difference, in which the derivations at any point is expressed in terms of the value of

the function at points in ascending or descending order with respect to the point under

consideration.

Three forms of finite difference are commonly considered:

(i) Forward difference: This is an expression of the form dn [f](x) = f(x + h)- f(x) and uses at

x + h and x.

(ii) Backward difference: This uses the function values at x and x h, instead of the value at

x + h and x. dn [f](x) = f(x) - f(x + h).

(iii) Central difference is given by dn [f] (x) = f(x + h) f (x h)

The central differences are more accurate than either forward or backward differences

and will therefore be used for this study. (Francis, 1968).

2.5 FINITE ELEMENT METHOD

The word Finite-element method signifies the process of dividing a continuous structural

system into finite elements for purpose of analysis.

The determination of stresses and displacement for continuous structural system such as shell,

wall and footing can be accomplished by representing the given structural system a finite number

of elements and performing an analysis in the finite-element model using the matrix approach.

Considering a tapered column, it is divided into finite-elements of five using finite approach for

its analysis. Individual elements are connected together by nodes and each nodal forces must be

related to the nodal displacement. The total displacement and force is obtained by the assemblage

of the forces and displacement from individual elements.

10
Finally, from equilibrium conditions, the nodal force obtained from the unknown nodal

displacements must balance the externally applied nodal forces; therefore, unknown

displacement, reaction and forces can be determined.

2.6 GLOBAL AND LOCAL COORDINATE SYSTEM

In the stiffness method, the overall geometry and the behavior of the structure are described with

reference to a Cartesian global coordinate system. It is also convenient to employ a local

(element) coordinated system which define for each element of the structure.

2.7 MATRIX METHOD OF STRUCTURAL ANALYSIS

This method basically requires that a structure, which has a degree of kinematic indeterminacy

equal to sy nk, is initially rendered determinate by imposing a system of nk constraints. This

gives rise to an unbalance system of forces at the each nodes. Then by allowing displacement to

occur at each node we obtain a series of forces displacement states. The nk equilibrium condition

at th nodes are then expressed in terms of displacement giving nk equation, the solution of which

gives the true value of the displacement at the nodes.

The greater the degree of indeterminacy, the greater the number of equations requiring solutions,

so that a computer-based approach is necessary when the degree of indeterminacy is high.

Generally this requires that a force displacement relationships in a structural member and to

examine the way in which these individual force-displacement relationship are combined to

produce a force-displacement relationship for the complete structure.

11
 CHAPTER THREE
3.0 METHODOLOGY

3.1 Finite Difference Method

For central differencing, obtain the difference equation from the following consideration by

Taylors expansion, we note that

Y(x+x)=y(x) + xy1(x) + (x)2/2! Y11(x) +. 1

Similarly,

Y(x-x)=y(x) - xy1(x) + (x)2/2! Y11(x) +. 2

where in both 1 and 2 higher order terms than the second degree are neglected. It follows from 1

and 2 that

Y(x+x) - Y(x-x)=2xy1(x)

Y ( x + x ) Y (xx)
Hence, y1(x) = 2 x . 3

By the same reasoning,

Y(x+x) - Y(x-x)= 2y(x) + (x)2 Y11(x)

Therefore,

Y ( x x )2 y ( x ) +Y ( x + x)
Y11(x) = ( x )
2 4

Using equidistance node system, with x=h (constant), and expressing equation 3 and 4 in terms

of the nodal values of y, we obtain

y i +1 y i1
y 1i = .. (5)
2h

y i12 y i + y i+1
y 1i = 2 . (6)
h

12
 l
Here h = n

Now, the second order ordinary differential equation of buckling of column is given by,

EIy11 + py = 0.. (7)

Where EI is the variable bending rigidity of the column (due to the fact that I varies with x), and

p is the axial compressive load carried by the column.

In terms of the finite difference model being adopted, equation 7 is transformed to

EIi yi11 + pyi = 0. (8)

in terms of the nodal parameters.

By virtue of (6), equation (8) can be re-written as:

y i12 y i + y i+1
EIi { h
2 } + pyi =0

y i12 y i+ yi +1
EIi { } + ph2yi = 0

The geometric configuration of the column easily justifies the expression for I i as obtained from

the following. At any section distant x from the column face, the diameter of that cross-section is

dD
( x )=D+ x
given by, l

1
x
= D {1 + l }. (10)

d
Where = D

d4 d4 1
x
Therefore, I(x) = 64 = 64 {1 + l }..(11)

13
But at any given node i,

li
X= n .. 12, where l is the column height, n is the number of subdivision. Consequently,

D4
from (11) and (12), we obtain the nodal moment of inertia at node (i) as, I i= 64 {1 +

1 il
( ) D4 1
l n }= 64 {1 + n }..(13)

E D4 1
Upon substituting for Ii from (13) into (9) we obtain, 64 {1 + l } {yi-1 2yi + yi+1}+

ph2yi = 0

Or

1 64 p h 2
[1 + l ] {yi-1 2yi + yi+1} + E D 4 yi = 0 .(14)

64 p h 2
Define = .(15) as the eigenvalues of this eigenproblem. Then equation
E D 4

(14) reduce to

1
[1 + y = 0.(15)
l ] {yi-1 2yi + yi+1} + i

Boundary conditions.

Since the column is completely restrained at the base,

Yo = yo1 = 0.. (16)

But by definition,

14
 y 1 y1
1
Yo = 2h = 0 or y1 = y-1 . (17)

Where y-1 is a phantom point node below the base. While y -1 has no physical importance, it is

nevertheless a useful mathematical quantity that introduces sense in the second of (16). It must

also be observed that by equation (6)

2 yo + y
y 1 2
1

Yo 11 =
h .. (18)

Since yo = 0, and y-1=y1, it follows that

Y1 0, otherwise, at buckling there is no restraining moment at the base a violation of the

physical intuition of the problem.

Commencing the system of equation from i = 1,

1
y y =0
{1 + n } ( o 2y1 + y2) + 1

1
y y =0
{1 + (2) n } ( 1 2y2 + y3) + 2

1
y y =0
{1 + (3) n } ( o 2y1 + y2) + 3

.
1
y y=0
{1 +(i) n } ( i1 2yi + yi+1) + i

15
.
.
.
.
.

{yn-1 2yn + yn+1 } + y =0

n

-2 1

1 0 0 0 0 .. y1 y1
0

-2 0 0 0 .. y2 y2
2 2 2

0 -2 0 0 .. y3 y3
3 3 3

0 0 -2 0 .. y4 + y =
4 4 4 4

.. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. ..

0 0 0 . -2 0 yi yi
i i i

.. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. ..

0 0 0 . .. .. -2 yn yn
n n

16
3.2 FINITE ELEMENT
Consider a typical element
d(xi+1)
xi+
1

xi+

xi
d(xi)

Take the diameter of the element to be mid-way between the max and min diameter as shown.
For instance,

d (1) = d (t/10)

d (2) = d (1 ( l + 2l) =d 3l
2 5 5 5

d (3) = d (1 (l/10 + 3l) = d 5l

2 5 10

d (i) = d (2i 1)l

10

But d (i) = d (2i 1)l = D 1 + -1 (2i i) l

10 l 10

= D 1 + ( -1) (2i i)
10

Hence

I (i) = [d(i) ] 4 = D4 1 + ( -1) (2i i) 4

64 64 10

17
In most practical eases, ranges from 0.5 0.8

Therefore, for the purpose of this work, choose = 0.75

P
d

= d = 0.75
D

KF =

12 6L -12 6L

EI 6L 4L -6L 2L2
L3
-12 -6L 12 -6L

6L 2L2 -6L 4L2

KG =

36 3L -36 3L
1 3L 4L2 -3L -2L2
30L
-36 -3L 36 -3L

18
 3L -2L2 -3L 4L2

CHAPTER FOUR

4.0 DISCUSSION OF RESULT

4.1 ENERGY METHOD

Rayleigh (see J.D Todd, structural theory and analysis) applied energy principles to obtain the
first Euler load (or buckling load) of a column in the form
l
d2 y
EI
0
( )
d x2
dx
Pcr= l (1)
dy
( dx)dx
0

where y(x) is the deflection at buckling or the first buckling mode shape. It has been shown that
if the exact buckled configuration y (x) is known, the eq 1 yields the exact value pf Pcr. However,
for columns of varying moments of inertia, it is a difficult task to obtain the exact form of y(x).
consequently, approximate shapes are assumed the result given an approximate value of pcr
calculated by the Rayleigh principle are sufficiently accurate for practical purposes if made
shapes that are not too different from exact are used. Besides, eq `1 gives an upper bound and
therefore results generated must be factored down to make for safety.

19
For a simply supported uniform column, it is known that the buckling mode is a sine wave. It is
therefore logical that the non-uniform column on simply supports (see figure above) can be
assumed to buckle into an approximately sinusoidal shape. We therefore take

x
y0
Y= sin l (2),

where y0 is a constant. Clearly, eq 2 satisfies the geometric boundary conditions: y (0) = y (l) = 0.

dD
x
Now, the diameter of any section distant x from the base is given by dx= D + l =

1
x
D {1 + l } (3),

d
where = D ,

It follows then that for that section, the corresponding moment of inertia is given by,
4
D4
I ( x )=
64
d 4x
64 {
1+
1
l
x } (4)

Substituting from (2), (3) and (4) into (1) gives

l 5 4 4

Pcr
E 64D
o
{
1+
1
l} x
sin2 dx
l
l 2 (5)
( l ) cos2 xl dx
0

l 2 2 l 2 2 l
x
But ( l ) cos 2 l
dx=
1
(
2 l ) ( l ) cos2 xl dx= 12 ( l ) (1+cos 2 xl ) dx
0 0 0

2
(6)
2l

20
 l 5 4 4

Also, E64
0
D
l
4
1+
1
l {x
x sin2 dx
l }
1
4
k { 1+ (1 ) } ( 1cos 2 ) d
0

x
Where = E 5 D 4 (7)
lk= 3
128 l

But
1
14 5 1
{1+(1 ) } d= 5 (1 ) [ {1+(1 ) } ]0
0

1
{51 }= 1 {1++2 +3 +4 } (8)
5 (1 ) 5

Also,
1
4
{1+(1 ) } cos 2 d
0

1 1
4 (1 )
[ sin 2
2
4
{ 1+ (1 ) }
0 2 0 ]
{ 1+ (1 ) }
3
sin 2 d

2 1
4 (1 )

( 2 )2
[ cos 2 {1+(1 ) } ] 4 ( 3 ) (1 )
3 1
0 2 {1+(1 ) }
2
cos 2 d
(2 ) 0

4 (1 ) 4 ( 3 ) (1 )2 1
(31 ) [ sin 2 {1+ (1 ) }]0
( 2 )2 ( 2 )3

21
 1+
3
+ 4 ( 3 ) ( 2 )(1 )
1
( 2 )3

0

4 (1 ) ( 31 ) 4 ( 3 ) ( 2 )(1 )3 1 + 4 ( 3 ) ( 2 )(1 )4

( 2 )2 ( 2 )4
[ {1+(1 ) }cos 2 ]0 (2 )4

cos 2 d
0

4
4 (1 ) ( 3 1 ) 4 ( 3 )( 2 ) (1 ) + 4 ( 3 ) ( 2 )(1 )4 1
[ sin 2 ] 0
( 2 )2 ( 2 )4 ( 2 )5

(5)

(1 ) (31 ) 3 (1 )4
= (9)
2 2 4

Substitute from (6), (7), (8), and (9), into (5) results in

{ }
3 4
( )
k
1
( 1++2 +3 +4 ) (1 ) 2 1 + 3 (14)
Pcr 5 2

2

2l

2++3+34
1++
E D 4 3 4
1 ( (1 ) (31 ) 3 (1 ) } (10)
64 l 2 +
5 2 2 4

In this particular case of 0.75, l=3 m

22
 E D 4 3
Pcr = {0.610.0146+6.0152 105 }
64 ( 3 )2

4 3 4
0.00103E D =0.032 E D

2
Where E and D are in N/ m and m respectively.

4.2 FINITE ELEMENT

4L2 2L2 - Y 4L2 -L2

2L2 4L2 -L2 4L2 =0

4-4Y 2+Y

2+Y 4-4Y =0

(4-4Y)2 (2+Y)2 = 0

(4 4Y -2 - Y) (4 4Y + 2 + Y) = 0

(2 5Y) (6 3Y) = 0

Y = 2, Y = 0.4

23
 2
PL
Y= 30 EI

30 E
( 0.875 ) 4 D 4
Pcr = 64 L
2

= 0.038 ED4

4.3 FINITE DIFFERENCE

% matrix data

yi=[-2; -1.629; -1.3122; -1.044; -0.8192; -0.633]

y11=[-2 1 0 0 0 0; 0.8145 -1.629 0.8145 0 0 0; 0 0.6561 -1.3122 0.6561 0 0; 0 0 0.522 -1.044

0.522 0; 0 0 0 0.4096 -0.8192 0.4096; 0 0 0 0 0.3164 -0.633]

k=sym('[lm]')

p=yi*k

q=(y11*yi)

h=q+p

% For 1st value

k1=h(1)

v1=sym2poly(k1)

rt1=roots(v1)

% For 2nd value

k2=h(2)

v2=sym2poly(k2)

24
rt2= roots(v2)

% For 3rd value

k3=h(3)

v3=sym2poly(k3)

rt3=roots(v3)

% For 4th value

k4=h(4)

v4=sym2poly(k4)

rt4=roots(v4)

% For 5th value

k5=h(5)

v5=sym2poly(k5)

rt5=roots(v5)

% For 6th value

k6=h(6)

v6=sym2poly(k6)

rt6=roots(v6)

mv=[rt1;rt2;rt3;rt4;rt5;rt6]

min_mv=min(mv)

25
yi = -2.0000

-1.6290

-1.3122

-1.0440

-0.8192

-0.6330

YII =

-2.0000 1.0000 0 0 0 0

0.8145 -1.6290 0.8145 0 0 0

0 0.6561 -1.3122 0.6561 0 0

0 0 0.5220 -1.0440 0.5220 0

0 0 0 0.4096 -0.8192 0.4096

0 0 0 0 0.3164 -0.6330

-2*lm

-1629/1000*lm

-6561/5000*lm

-261/250*lm

26
 -512/625*lm

-633/1000*lm

q = 2.3710

-0.0441

-0.0319

-0.0227

-0.0158

0.1415

h = 2371/1000-2*lm

-12425966174371/281474976710656-1629/1000*lm

-35900962343541/1125899906842624-6561/5000*lm

-408112595352613/18014398509481984-261/250*lm

-71204432124519/4503599627370496-512/625*lm

2548931464428465/18014398509481984-633/1000*lm

k1 = 2371/1000-2*lm

27
v1 = -2.0000 2.3710

rt1 = 1.1855

k2 = -12425966174371/281474976710656-1629/1000*lm

v2 = -1.6290 -0.0441

rt2 = -0.0271

k3 = -35900962343541/1125899906842624-6561/5000*lm

v3 = -1.3122 -0.0319

rt3 = -0.0243

k4 = -408112595352613/18014398509481984-261/250*lm

v4 = -1.0440 -0.0227

rt4 = -0.0217

k5 = -71204432124519/4503599627370496-512/625*lm

v5 = -0.8192 -0.0158

rt5 = -0.0193

k6 = 2548931464428465/18014398509481984-633/1000*lm

v6 = -0.6330 0.1415

rt6 = 0.2235

28
mv = 1.1855

-0.0271

-0.0243

-0.0217

-0.0193

0.2235

min_mv = -0.0271

Regarding the Rayleigh quotient as the standard, then,

0.0380.032
100
F.E error = 0.032

= 18.75

29
 CHAPTER FIVE

5.0 CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS

5.1 CONCLUSION

In conclusion, the finite element method is simple to use and yields a very good result when
determining buckling loads of non-uniform columns. Also, the nature of variation in the moment
of inertia allows easy calculation of integrals in Rayleighs method, and it is the shortest of the
three.

5.2 RECOMMENDATIONS

1. Non- uniform columns are becoming more popularly used and therefore designers must devise
ways of accessing the buckling load of these columns.

2. Further studies on improving these numerical methods should be carried out.

30
 REFERENCES

J.D Todd, structural theory and analysis

Allen H.G and Bulson P.S (1980), Background to buckling, McGraw-hill book company limited,
England,

Chudley R and Greeno R (2006), Building construction Handbook, Sixth edition.

Saha G and Banu S (2007); buckling load of a beam-column for different end conditions using
multi-segment integration techniques Journal of engineering, vol 2 no 1.

Ghali A and Neville A.M (1989); Structural analysi, a unified classical and matrix approach
(second edition) Chapman and hill publication London.

Francis B.H (1968); Finite difference equations and simulations, section 2.2, Prentice Hall,
Englewood cliffs New Jersey.

Khurmi R.S (2005); Strength of materials (mechanics of solid), S. chand and company Ltd. New
Delhi.

l.J.M Gere and S.P Timoshenko, Buckling, in Mackling, in Mechanics of matrials, PWS
publishing Company, boston (1997) pp. 731-804.

R.R. Craig, Jr., Buckling of Columns, in Machanics of Materials, John Wiley and Sons, New
York (1996) PP. 511-553.

31
E . P. Popov, Buckling of Colummns, iin Introduction to Machanics of Solids, Prentice- Haill,
Englewood Cliffs (1968) pp. 515-551.

S.H. Crandall, N.C. Dahl and T. J. Lardner, stability of Eguilibrium: Buckling, In An

Introduction to the Mechanics of solids, MeGrew-Hill Kogakusha, Tokyo (1978) pp. 577-612.

B. Budiansky and J. Hutchinson, Buckling: progress and Challenge, Trends in Solid Mechanicsn
(J. F. Besseling and and A.M.A Van der Heijden, eds). Delft University press, (1979) pp. 93-116.

32