1.2.1 Buckling analysis of beams

Product: ABAQUS/Standard  

In this example we illustrate the application of ABAQUS to the buckling analysis of beams. Such buckling studies usually require two types of analyses.

Eigenvalue analysis is used to obtain estimates of the buckling loads and modes. The concept of eigenvalue buckling prediction is to investigate singularities in a linear perturbation of the structure's stiffness matrix. The resulting estimates will be of value in design if the linear perturbation is a realistic reflection of the structure's response before it buckles. For this to be the case, the structural response should be linear elastic. In other words, eigenvalue buckling is useful for “stiff” structures (structures that exhibit only small, elastic deformations prior to buckling). Such analysis is performed using the *BUCKLE procedure (Eigenvalue buckling prediction, Section 6.2.3 of the ABAQUS Analysis User's Manual), with the “live” load applied within the step. The buckling analysis provides the factor by which the live load must be multiplied to reach the buckling load. Any preload must be added to the load from the *BUCKLE step to compute the total collapse load.

It is usually also necessary to consider whether the postbuckling response is stable or unstable and if the structure is imperfection sensitive. In many cases the postbuckled stiffness may not be positive. The collapse load will then depend strongly on imperfections in the original geometry (“imperfection sensitivity”). This is addressed by following the eigenvalue prediction with a load-displacement analysis of the structure. Typically this is done by assuming an imperfection in the original geometry, in the shape of the buckling mode, and studying the effect of the magnitude of that imperfection on the response. Material nonlinearity is often included in such collapse studies. This example illustrates these analyses for some simple, classical, beam problems.

Problem description

Results and discussion

Input files

Reference

Tables

Table 1.2.1–1 Flexural buckling load estimates (values given in MN).

EigenvectorEstimatedTheoreticalDirection
 buckling loadbuckling load 
10.43710.4372y (1)
23.92673.9347y (2)
37.45757.5182z (1)
410.867010.9300y (3)
521.179621.4220y (4)
634.739435.4130y (5)
751.371752.9000y (6)
863.044867.6640z (2)
970.843573.8860y (7)
1092.855398.3680y (8)
number of half sine waves

Table 1.2.1–2 Flexural and torsional buckling load estimates (values given in MN).

EigenvectorEstimatedTheoreticalMode (n)
 buckling loadbuckling load 
11.75441.7704Flexural - y (1)
26.42356.4134Torsional (1)
37.05777.0814Flexural - y (2)
413.136313.0300Torsional (2)
516.030715.9330Flexural - y (3)
624.573524.0590Torsional (3)
728.876928.3260Flexural - y (4)
829.752230.1110Flexural - z (1)
941.123439.4980Torsional (4)
1045.884044.2590Flexural - y (5)


Figures

Figure 1.2.1–1 Beam cross-section details.

Figure 1.2.1–2 Elastica results.

Figure 1.2.1–3 Progressive deformed configurations of elastica.

Figure 1.2.1–4 Load versus deflection curve for lateral buckling problem.