Int. I. Mechanical Science, 1976, Vol. 18, pp. 269-277. Pergamon Press.

Printed in Great Britain

LARGE DEFLECTION ANALYSIS OF

ELASTO-PLASTIC BEAMS A N D FRAMES

JAN B,~CKLUND
Department of Mechanical Engineering, Link6ping Institute of Technology,
Link6ping, Sweden

(Received 25 November 1975; in revised form 5 May 1976)

Summary--Ageneral method for analysis of elasto--plastic beams and frames with large displacements
is described in this paper. A hybrid-type beam element with 3d[ at each end is used in the analysis. The
element stiffness matrix is obtained by inversion of a flexibility matrix, which is computed from an
assumed distribution of internal forces along the element axis. This approach with approximations of
the stress fields better imitates varying stiffness along the beam than the traditional approach with
assumed displacement fields.
Large displacement effects are taken into account by updating the geometry (both node co-ordinates
and cross-section shapes) and accurately computing the elongations of each element. Partial yielding is
considered across the height of the beam as well as along the element axis.

NOTATION t o n ) GilP and Hodge? These papers treat various

B, C, D interpolation matrices aspects of non-linear beam analysis such as
b width of beam rigid-plastic and elastic-plastic beams with finite
E, tangent modulus deflections and non-uniform elastic beams with
F~(/~) stiffness (flexibility) matrix of beam lamina
F,([,) local stiffness (flexibility) matrix of beam large deflections. A characteristic feature of each of
element these works is that they cover only one special
17, stiffness matrix of structure problem, which is usually solved by analytical
F~, F, parts of global stiffness matrix of beam element methods.
due to initial stresses and strain increments,
respectively For nonlinear analysis of beams a numerical
L length of beam element method offers considerable advantages. A realistic
M bending moment, vector of local element forces stress-strain diagram can be used and beams with
m curvature, vector of element deformation complex geometry, boundary conditions and load-
N axial force, vector of beam lamina forces ing can be treated.
n axial elongation, vector of beam lamina defor-
mations This paper presents a hybrid-type finite beam
P(p) global load (displacement) vector element 5 for analysis of plane beams or frames
0 end moments, vector of global element forces comprised of one or two (i.e. reinforced concrete)
q end rotations, vector of global element displace- nonlinear materials. The beams may have varying
ments
R(r) residual force (displacement) vector cross section and very large displacements are
T shear force, transformation matrix allowed for. The assumptions made are listed
U, W global end forces below.
u, w global end displacements (1) Bernoulli's hypothesis holds, i.e. plane cross-
X, Z global co-ordinates sections remain plane. The cross-sections are
x, z local co-ordinates
a chord slope perpendicular to the beam axis, i.e. shear deforma-
A increment tions are neglected.
strain (2) Curvatures are small but axial strains may be
v Poisson's ratio large. Within an element, additional moments due
tr stress
to axial force and axial shortening caused by
bowing are disregarded.
INTRODUCTION (3) The cross-sections are simply or doubly
THE NONLINEAR behaviour of beams has attained symmetric. Lateral buckling and local buckling do
considerable interest during the two last decades. not occur.
Recent exponents of this interest are the papers by (4) The loads increase monotonically. Local
Verma and Krishna Murty, 1 Campbell and Charl- unloading is taken into account. All loads act at the

269
270 JAN B A C K L U N D

n o d e s as c o n c e n t r a t e d f o r c e s and m o m e n t s . Distri- multiplication by the tangent modulus E, of the material,

b u t e d axial and t r a n s v e r s e load m u s t be d i s c r e t i z e d
to c o n c e n t r a t e d loads. Act = E,A,:. = E, z a m + E,n. (4)

Integration over the depth of the beam gives the

LOCAL ELEMENT MATRIX
In this section the local tangent stiffness matrix FI of
the element is derived. This matrix gives the relationship
between increments AM = [AM,AMzAN~]' of local ele-
ment forces and increments a m = [am,am2an2]' of the
corresponding deformations, Fig. 1. The element forces
selected are statically independent. The element matrix F,
thus describes deformations only (rigid body motions are
eliminated).
The increments a M ( x ) and a N ( x ) of bending moment
and axial force at a section x of the element, Fig. 1, are
assumed to vary along the element axis as
x x 1Faro,1
[am(x)l = I L E O//aM q
UaN(x)/ 0 0 1J LAN2J
or in matrix notation
AN = CAM.
A beam lamina at a section x of the element is considered,
Fig. 2. The increment A~ of the strain ~(x, z) at a distance
z below a fixed centre C is expressed in increments
am (x) and a n (x) of curvature and axial strain at C by the
Bernoulli hypothesis as
increments of the sectional forces a M ( x ) and a N ( x ) in
terms of a m ( x ) and an(x),
raM(x)] = .f fa bz] dz _ f [ .bz 2 E,bz]. ram(x)]
a N ( x ) J .I [ Atrb J - J UE, bz E,b ] az[ an(x) J
(5)
AN = F~An. (6)
Here F, is the tangent stiffness matrix of the beam lamina.
The inverse relationship is
a n = ~ AN (7)
where /~ = FF' is the tangent flexibility matrix of the
(1) lamina.
Generally, numerical integration must be performed
when computing the tangent stiffness matrix F,. There-
fore, the beam lamina is thought of as built up from a
number of fibres of finite thicknesses and with rectangular
(2) cross-sections, see /~g~dh? Within each of these fibres
Simpson's integration scheme (three-point integration) is
used to evaluate the contributions to F,.
The end rotations am, and a m : and the elongation anz
can be directly integrated from the curvature a m (x) and
the axial strain a n ( x ) according to the formulas

a ~ ( x , z) = zam(x)+an(x).
(3) /am2/=fo L x
-~-
Am(x)
an(x)]dx (8)
The corresponding stress increment is obtained by Lanai 0

AM 1 AM 2
Am1 Aw(x) ~ ~ ' - ' ~
_~u (x) m2 AN
-~-~An 2

Z
FIG. 1. Element in local co-ordinate system lxz.

An
/Am

t
dx=l Ae I
~b(z L

z
FIG. 2. Beam lamina with monosymmetric cross-section. (a) Lamina of original length 1. (b)
Cross-section.
 Large deflection analysis of elasto-plastic beams and frames 271

moment varies linearly but the curvature variation is

Am = fo L C A n dx.
The tangent flexibility matrix f~ of the element is obtained
from equations (2), (7) and (9).
Am = ( f f - c'f~C dx)AM
Am = f~AM.
In the general case the elements of f~ cannot be exactly
evaluated. A numerical integration must be employed. For
this integration, as well as for the integration of the
stiffness matrix of the lamina, the Simpson integration
scheme is used. This scheme has been preferred to more
refined Gaussian quadrature methods since it traces
yielding in the extreme fibres of the sections and at the
ends of the elements. If three integration points are used
in each element the integral in equation (10) is replaced by
the sum
f , = L ( c ' f ~ C ) . - o +--~(C
4L ,f, C)._L,2+~(C
L ,f, C) . . . .
The tangent stiffness matrix F~ is then obtained by
inversion of the flexibility matrix
F, = f,-'.
In a conventional finite element analysis 7 the displace-
ments (or the strains) rather than the internal forces are
approximated by interpolation functions. For the model
described above a linearly varying curvature and a
constant axial strain result in the strain-displacement
relationships
4 6x 2 6x 1 ] rAmq
[Am(x)] L2 L L2 0
= /amq
tAn(x)J 0 0 LAn2J
(9) strongly nonlinear. (The load is assumed to be discretized
so that no load acts between the nodes.) These relations
hold also for linearly elastic beams with varying
cross-section along the beam axis. As an example a
cantilever with constant width and linearly varying depth,
Fig. 3, was analysed by the two alternative models.
(10) Table 1 compares the errors in rotation m at the right
end and in stresses ~ra and o,, at the extreme fibres of the
(11) end sections for a bending moment M acting at the free
end. The results were obtained using small deflection
theory. The errors are related to the exact values given by
the Navier beam theory.
>X
L
FIG. 3. Linearly elastic cantilever with varying stiffness.
(12) GLOBAL E L E M E N T MATRIX
In this section the global tangent stiffness matrix F, of
the element is derived. This matrix gives the relationship
between increments AQ = [AQ~AQ~A W, A W2AU~AU:]'
of global element forces, Fig. 4(b), and increments
(13) Aq = [Aq~Aq2Aw~Aw2Au~Au2]' of the associated global
displacements, Fig. 4(a).
The relationships between increments of the element
deformations and increments of the global displacements
can be written, Figs. 4(a), 4(c) and 5.
Am~ = A q l -- Aa (16)
Am2 = A q z - Aa (17)
An2 = (Aw2 - Awl) sin (a + Aa)
+(Au2-AuOcos(a + Aa)-L(1-cosAa). (18)

Here, a and a + Aa are the slopes of the chord in the two

or An = B A m (14)
consecutive states. Equation (18) is readily deduced by
and the tangent stiffness matrix means of Fig. 5.
For small increments Aa of the chord slope the
following relationships hold
F,d = fo'- B ' ~ B dx. (15)

L(1 - c o s Aa) = 2L s i n -2Aa lLAct 2

-f- ~ ~ (19)
The superiority of the hybrid-type element presented
above is obvious in cases of beams whose stiffness varies
along the axis. Consider for example an elasto-plastic
Aa = l [ ( A w e - Aw0 cos a - (Au2 - Au0 sin a ] (20)
beam in the range of small deflections. For this beam the

TABLE 1. PERCENTAGE ERROR IN ROTATION m, AND STRESSES o',,t A N D o'~

No. of Approximated Error in m Error in tr,t Error in ~r~

elements field (%) (%) (%)

1 Force 2.67 0.00 0.00

Displacement 6.16 37.46 37.46
2 Force 0.27 0.00 0.00
Displacement 0.73 7.92 15,06
4 Force 0.02 0.00 0.00
Displacement 0.06 1.77 4.85

Numerical integration over three points in each element.

272 JAN B.~CKLUND

I ........... I ~ "*X I I__ >X

wI Q1

L+AL ~ TM
[&w 2

U2+AU2
Z (a) (b) w2+z~w2~ Q2+AQ2

r I ~X

N~I'

L + & n 2 ~ ~ ~~' ~ 2 ~
" m2+A~m2~M2{AM2

T+ &T2/ ~ N 2 + A N 2
Z
(c)
FIG. 4. Beam element in global system at two consecutive states. (a) Geometrical quantities. (b) Global
element forces. (c) Local element forces.

J ' ~X
An= = (Aw~ - Aw,) sin (a + Aa)

+ (Au~ - Au,) cos (or + Aa) - 1 L A a 2 . (21)

Z

To linearize the step-by-step analysis, Aa is neglected in

equation (21) in the derivation of the element matrix, but it
is retained in the computation of the element elongation
An2 after the incremental equations have been solved. By
use of equations (16), (17), (20), and (21) the following
see Fig b ~ - relationships between incremental deformations and
Y deflections are obtained (Act is neglected in (21)).
(a)
I-Aq,7

[m,l=Fio
Amz|
An2J
1 c,L
0
clL
-s
-_c,L
c/L
s
--s,/,LL
-c
s,'L]
s/L[ / aq2/
|aw,l
/awq
c /Au,/
~--~-~ Au2-ku 1
LAu~J
i w (22)
s = sin c~ c =cos~

Am = TAq. (23)
L (1 - c o s A e O ~ 2
Statical equivalence between global and local element
(b) forces for the two consecutive states gives

FIG. 5. Element elongation An2. (a) Position of the beam QI = MI

chord. (b) Detail of end 2. Q2 = M2
 Large deflection analysis of elasto-plastic b e a m s and f r a m e s 273

Wt = - N t sin a + T cos a AQ~ = F . A q . (32)

W2 = N2 sin a - T cost~
U1 = - N1 cos a - T sin s T h e total element tangent stiffness matrix in the global
[/2 = N2 cos a + T sin a (24) s y s t e m is n o w obtained by combination of equations (23),
(30), and (32) together with the local relationship
and A M = F j A m as

Q, + AQt = M, + AMt A Q = T' A M + AQ~ = T ' F t A m + F~Aq

Q2+ AQ: = M2 + AM2 =(T'FLT+F~)Aq=(F.+F~)Aq=FgAq. (33)
W~ + A Wt = - (N~ + ANt) sin (a + A s )
+(T + AT)cos(a +As) T h e tangent stiffness matrix is thus c o m p o s e d of two parts
W2 + AW2 = (N2 + AN2) sin (a + A s ) F. a n d F,, corresponding to strain increments and initial
- ( T + AT) c o s ( s +As)
stresses, respectively. This is characteristic of geometri-
Ut + A U t = - ( N , + ANt) cos (a + A s ) cally nonlinear problems, see Zienkiewicz? T h e relation-
- ( T + A T ) sin (a +Aa)
ships used in the derivation are s u m m a r i z e d in a
U2 + A U2 = (N2 + AN2) cos ( s + A s ) transformation diagram, Fig. 6.
+ (T + A T ) sin ( s +As)
(25) SOLUTION PROCEDURE
w h e r e Nt = N~ a n d T = (Mr + M2)IL. T h e increments AQ W h e n all element tangent matrices have been c o m p u t e d
o f global forces are obtained by subtraction of equation according to equation (33) a n d assembled, a set of linear
(24) f r o m (25). algebraic equations is obtained, which can be written as

AQt = AM, AP = F, Ap. (34)

AQ2 = AM2
AW~ = A T cos a - ANt sin a - T A a sin a - N t A a cos a Here, A p and Ap are force and displacement increments,
AW2 = - - A T Cos a + AN2 sin s + T A a sin a + N2Aa cos s
AUt = - A T sin a - AN~ cos a - T A a cos a + N~Aa sin s
AU2 = AT sin s + AN2 cos a + T A a cos a - N~Aa sin a. Tt
l -
(26)
H e r e b y , t h e following trigonometrical relationships,
which hold for small As, were utilized

sin ( s + A s ) ~ sin a + A s cos s (27)

cos ( s + A a ) ~ cos s - A s sin s . (28)
fibre lamina element element
local global
Insertion of A T = (AM, + A M D I L and N ~ = Nt = N into
equation (26) yields FIG. 6. B e a m e l e m e n t transformations.

o
1
o
o laU~l
+ o 1
i~w,/ ciL c/L -s LAN~J rs-N I
(29)
IAwH I-elL -~IL ~ r~+Nc I
/au,/ I-~/L -~/L - rc+Ns I
LAU2J L s/L s/L Tc-NsJ

AQ = T'AM+AQ~. (30) respectively, and F, is the tangent stiffness matrix of the

element assembly. D u e to the geometrical nonlinearities
T h e last term of equation (30) is essential in stability considered, it is not satisfactory to use only a step-by-step
problems only. In s u c h problems the axial force N is m e t h o d in the analysis. Some iterative procedure m u s t be
m u c h larger t h a n the s h e a r force T. Neglecting T, a n d incorporated to reduce truncation errors and to a s s u r e
using equation (20), the term AQ~ can be simplified to equilibrium of the structure at various load levels.
There exists an almost infinite n u m b e r of possible
1 combinations of various step-by-step and iteration techni-
A Q , =~-
ques for solving nonlinear problems. To the a u t h o r ' s
knowledge a thorough review a n d c o m p a r i s o n of s u c h
IO 0 0 0 0 ] [-Aq, -] m e t h o d s h a s not been carried out so far. In the following,
0 0 0 0 0 laq~l a simple step-by-step procedure is u s e d together with a

Nc ~ Nsc
cllaw,l (31)
-IVsc I I a w H
combination of ordinary and modified N e w t o n - R a p h s o n
iterations see Fig. 7.
svu Ns2 -Ns~//Au,/ In the N e w t o n - R a p h s o n iteration s c h e m e , residual
N s 21 LAu2 J forces R are c o m p u t e d as the difference between applied
274 JAN B)~CKLUND

IRe d input dato I

length of
IIncreasethe load by AP~

~Establish the tangent stiff-
/I
Ill //
further
~ t ness of the structure
&
I
j
l

/ first iteration: lenqth of Solve the system of equations [

AP=FtA p or R=Ftr

Calculate strain increments be,

total strains =~+A and total
displacements p=p+~p (or p=p+r)
CHARACTERISTIC DISPLACEMENT
i
Update coordinates,element lengths I
FIG. 7. C o m b i n e d step-by-step and iteration procedure.
and cross-sections
i
loads (P) and the s u m (EQ) of element forces trans- ]
f o r m e d to the global system. 7 Calculate total stresses o. [

R = P - EQ. (35)
Integrate to moments and axial
forces in each element [
The residual forces are applied to the structure and
Calculate residual forces R]
corresponding displacements r are calculated
YES
Should iteration be performed?
R = F,r. (36)

T h e s e displacement increments change the element

forces, n e w residual forces are c o m p u t e d etc. T h e
procedure is stopped w h e n s o m e c h o s e n criteria are
fulfilled, see i.e. B e r g a n ?
After the displacement increments Ap have been
solved from equation (34) the local deformations are
calculated by m e a n s of equations (16)-(18). T h e n the
strain increments Ae of the individual fibres are c o m p u t e d
according to equation (3) and added to previously
calculated values of e. Total stresses tr in the fibres are
obtained from the total strains using the s t r e s s - s t r a i n
relationship, and integrated to total m o m e n t s and axial
forces at the three integration points of each element. T h e
section forces calculated in this w a y are generally
inconsistent with the a s s u m p t i o n s of c o n s t a n t axial force
and linearly varying bending m o m e n t . T h e s e deviations
cancel h o w e v e r as the n u m b e r of elements are increased.
Finally, another r e m a r k will be m a d e about the integration
of stresses to bending m o m e n t s and axial forces at the
three integration points of each element. Before this
integration is p e r f o r m e d the shape of the cross-section is
updated. N e w fibre widths, thicknesses, and co-ordinates
are c o m p u t e d using transverse strain increments Aey and
A~
A~y = Ae~ = - vAe (37)
where v is P o i s s o n ' s ratio. If the fibre is in the plastic
range, v is set equal to 0.5.
A computer program designated R A M F E M , based on
the theory presented above, has been developed by the
author and T~tgrdors. 9 By this program nonlinear b e a m s
and f r a m e s can be analysed by an optional combination of
steps and iterations. T h e main steps of the program are
s u m m a r i z e d in a flow chart, Fig. 8. Here R and r are
residual forces and associated displacements c o m p u t e d in
Print results for actual, load
level
I
Has the load level assign- [. NO
ed been reached?
I
FIG. 8. Flow chart of nonlinear f r a m e program R A M F E M .
the iteration procedure. It should be noted that the true
and not the nominal s t r e s s - s t r a i n relationship is required
in the input data 9 if large strain problems are to be solved.
CANTILEVER WITH CONCENTRATED LOADS
T h e cantilever in Fig. 9 is loaded by two concentrated
loads 0.85 P and 1.35 P. The b e a m h a s a u n i f o r m
rectangular cross-section with width b = 0 . 0 5 m and
height h = 0 . 0 0 0 2 5 m . Y o u n g ' s m o d u l u s is E =
207 G N / m 2. The bending and axial stiffnesses are held
c o n s t a n t throughout the entire load history. Fig. 9 s h o w s
the calculated displaced position of the b e a m for a load
multiplier P = 4.45N. In Table 2 the results are c o m p a r e d
with values of the displacements calculated by Frisch-
F a y a and Manuel and L e e ? ' In all, 10 steps and 30
iterations were used.
SIMPLY SUPPORTED BEAM WITH
UNIFORM LOAD
T h e b e a m in Fig. 10 is uniformly loaded and hinged at
both ends. T h e b e a m material is elastic-ideally plastic
with Y o u n g ' s m o d u l u s E = 220 G N / m 2 and yield stresses
try = 300 M N / m 2. Fig. 10 displays relationships between
 Large deflection analysis of elasto-plastic b e a m s and f r a m e s 275

TABLE 2. COMPARISONOF DISPLACEMENTS(m) FORCANTILEVERWITHCONCENTRATEDLOADS

Horizontal Vertical Horizontal Vertical

displacements displacements displacements displacements
in B in B in C in C

F r i s c h - F a y ' 0.210 0.639 0.788 1.710

Manuel a n d L e e H 0.206 0.631 0.781 1.701
RAMFEM 9 0.200 0.638 0.787 1.716

1.322m 1.288m also for first order analysis of beams.) T h e c o m p u t e d

i linear g e o m e t r y asymptotically approaches the curve
0 C
load-deflection curve for elasto-plastic b e a m with non-
corresponding to a plastic m e m b r a n e . T h e n u m b e r s of
steps u s e d in the various calculations are s h o w n by the
small circles in Fig. 10. B e t w e e n 3 a n d 5 iterations were
p e r f o r m e d within each step. In Fig. 11 the variations of
stresses in the e x t r e m e fibres of the central section
according to T i m o s h e n k o and W o i n o w s k y - K r i e g e r '2 and
R A M F E M 9 are compared. O n e half of the b e a m was
divided into five elements of equal lengths.

REINFORCED CONCRETE BEAM

C ~ 1 . 3 5 P 12(a) is subjected to four concentrated loads. It has a
FIG. 9. Slender cantilever with concentrated loads.
load intensity W and central deflection w for various
a s s u m p t i o n s . In all c a s e s the displacements are small
c o m p a r e d with the b e a m length L = 0.5 m. T h e results
obtained by R A M F E M favourably c o m p a r e both with an
analytical solution '2 for linearly elastic b e a m s with
nonlinear g e o m e t r y a n d with yield hinge theory of b e a m s
with linear geometry. (The p r o g r a m R A M F E M allows
T h e simply supported reinforced concrete b e a m in Fig.
rectangular cross-section and is reinforced by two ~b6
steel bars, Fig. 12(b). A n experimentally obtained
s t r e s s - s t r a i n diagram for the reinforcement is s h o w n in
Fig. 13(a), see P e t e r s s o n ? 3 For the concrete the following
test results were o b t a i n e d : "
Initial m o d u l u s of elasticity Eb = 25 G N / m 2
M a x i m u m c o m p r e s s i v e stress trbc = 25 M N / m 2
M a x i m u m tensile stress trb, = 2.3 M N / m ~.
B a s e d on t h e s e values a third degree polynomial was
a s s u m e d for the s t r e s s - s t r a i n relationship of the concrete,

LARGE DISPLACEMENT THEORY

MN/m
elastic beam / plastic ~//
12 / membrane/ /
W Timoshenko / / / /
1.5 IIIlITIINlllll[llllllllilllllllllll[l[llllNIINllw
~ e l a s t 'lc - I / "/--
/ 2c elasto-plastic
L ~ beam 9 / / / beam ~FEM9

H E= 220 GN/m2 / /
~l.0- O'y= 300 MN/m2 / /
z L: o.5o m / /
0.01m / /
bo lm ////
0.5- // THEORY

first
yielding--~ yield hinge theory ~
~ ~ ! e~aSo~p~ash~tS beam

0.005 0.010 0.015 0.020 m

CENTRAL DEFLECTION w

FIG. 10. Load-deflection c u r v e s for simply support beam.

276 JAN BACKLUND

IHIIHtll l;:IIIHII:H~IiIH:H:H:IIIIIJ:[J
"2'OoOLl
t o
~ _
/
~ . . . .
~ OB' TlmsnenKo
~2
~
~_ L/2
A
~ 5/2 ,';

: - o o o o a o c '- a ~ ~-o o
/~-flrst yielding ~-- B' RAMFEM9~ :
to 200~ /
to
o A ,R A M F ~
E~ i00-
to ! . . . . , ' ' , ,
~ ,, / LOAD INTENSITY W
0
0 5 ~ 1 5 ~/m 2 0
-i00-

-200-
~x-- OA, Timoshenko 12
-300-

FIG. 11. Variation of stresses in top fibre A and bottom fibre B in central section of simply supported
beam.

0.58m kN P
F 0.30m ~

0.10m

I TP i0
IP 0.70m
r
....... 0.3 5m
(a)

2~6 (diameter6.15ram) ~/fff - - e x p e r i m e n t 13

" ..... RAMFEM 9
0.10ml [L~.:.,:~
~ ~ i ' : t :~.......... I0.O82m

0.20m
o.8oi 0.602 m

FIG. 12. Simply supported reinforced concrete beam. (a)
Load and geometry. (b) Cross-section.
Fig. 13(b). Hereby the ultimate compressive strain was
set equal to ebc = 2.5960. The deflection at point B of the
beam, Fig. 12 computed by R A M F E M is compared with
experimentally obtained values 13in Fig. 14. In the author's
opinion, the results are satisfactory considering the
uncertainties associated with the experimental data of the
concrete. The computation by R A M F E M required a total
of 10 steps and 33 iterations for four elements.
FIG. 14. Experimentally '3 and numerically obtained rela-
tionship between load P and deflection PB at point B of
reinforced concrete beam.
STEEL FRAME
The pitched roof portal frame in Fig. 15 is subjected to
one horizontal and seven vertical concentrated loads. The
cross-section of the frame is shown in Fig. 15 and the
assumed stress-strain diagram of the steel (steel of BS
968, see Sawko and Wilde '4) is given in Fig. 16.

MN/m 2 O

500-

25O
/ MN/m 2

10

0.'01 0.'02 . o.8o3~

FIG. 13. Stress-strain diagrams. (a) Steel. (b) Concrete.
 Large deflection analysis of elasto-plastic beams and frames 277

P P

o
P

!30m 1 P
PI j ~ "
0.50P . # / v - - u . ~ m
~ .
--<~. j
pI h=O .89m
~'~0 50P

2.67m] II. o.~T~ ~ _[[I

0.9
15.24m
2.82P 3.18P
FIG. 15. Pitched roof portal steel frame.
FIG. 18. Displacements just prior to collapse. Linear
geometry.
MN/m 2
moments and, consequently the ultimate load. Spreading
4OO of plastic zones leads to a smooth load-displacement
curve.
yield stress 0y=434 MN/m 2 The decrease in carrying capacity due to second order
2OO effects (nonlinear geometry) should be pointed out, see
yield strain ey=2.15.10 -3
Fig. 17. The elasto--plastic solution obtained by RAM-
FEM with second order effects included gave an ultimate
e 0.02 0.04 0.06 load which is 27% below that of the first order solution.
Y The displacements just prior to collapse obtained by the
linear geometry are given to scale in Fig. 18.
FIG. 16. Stress-strain diagram for high yield stress steel to
BS 968TM.
REFERENCES
1. M. K. VERMA and A. V. KI~SrtNA MURTY, Int. J.

,0
// LINEAR GEOMETRY
INEAR GEOMETRY
30 RAMFEM9
Sawko and Wilde 15
0.5 1.0
FIG. 17. Load-displacement curves of portal frame.
The frame was analyzed by RAMFEM using a
subdivision into 10 elements as indicated in Fig. 15. Two
different calculations were performed; one including both
geometrical and material nonlinearities (11 steps, 34
iterations), the other material nonlinearities only (7 steps,
21 iterations). The horizontal displacement h of joint D
obtained for the two cases for different load levels are in
Fig. 17 compared with values computed by Sawko and
Wilde. '5 In their analysis reduction of the yield moment
M, due to axial force was not considered. Further,
non-elasticity was confined to (strain hardening) hinges,
i.e. spreading of plastic zones was disregarded. Both these
effects are included in the present method. As can be seen
from Fig. 17 there is a significant difference between the
two solutions.
The axial force considerably reduces the ultimate
mech. Sci. 15, 183 (1973).
2. T. I. CAMPBELL and T. M. CHARLTON, Int. J. mech.
Sci. 15, 415 (1973).
3. S. S. GILL, Int. J. mech. Sci. 15, 465 (1973).
4. P. G. HODGE, JR., Int. J. mech. Sci. 16, 385 (1974).
5. J. BACKLUND, Finite Element Analysis o f Nonlinear
Structures, Diss. No. 129, Chalmers University of
Technology, Grteborg (1973).
6. L. ]~GARD, Analytical and Numerical Analyses o[
Nonlinear Beam Elements, Diss. No. 152, Chalmers
University of Technology, Grteborg (1974).
7. O. C. ZIENrdEWlCZ, The finite Element Method in
Engineering Science, McGraw-Hill, London (1971).
8. P.G. BERGAN,Nonlinear Analysis o[ Plates Consider-
ing Geometric and Material Effects, The Norwegian
Institute of Technology, Division of Structural
m
Mechanics, Report No. 72-1, Trondheim (1972).
9. J. BACKLUND and H. TAGNFORS, R A M F E M - - A
Computer Program for Analysis o[ Nonlinear Plane
Beams and Frames. (in Swedish), Chalmers Univer-
sity of Technology, Department of Structural
Mechanics, Publication 75:7, Grteborg (1975).
10. R. FRISCH-FAY, J. appl. Mech. 28, 87 (1%1).
11. F. S. MANUEL and S. LEE, J. Franklin Inst. 285, 452
(1%8).
12. S. TIMOSHENKOand S. WOINOWKSY--KRIEGER,Theory
of Plates and Shells, (2nd edit.) McGraw-Hill, New
York (1959).
13. H. PETERSSON, Bending Stiffness of Slabs in Shear
Wall Structures, Chalmers University of Technology,
Department of Building Construction, G6teborg, to be
published.
14. F. SAWKO and A. M. B. WILDE, Proc. ICE 37, 195
(1%7).
15. F. SAWKOAnd A. M. B. WILDE, I A B S E Publ 29-i, 51
(1%9).