Vol. 8, No. 1, 2013
Download this article
Download this article For screen
For printing
Recent Issues

Volume 19
Issue 5, 747–835
Issue 4, 541–746
Issue 3, 303–540
Issue 2, 157–302
Issue 1, 1–156

Volume 18, 5 issues

Volume 17, 5 issues

Volume 16, 5 issues

Volume 15, 5 issues

Volume 14, 5 issues

Volume 13, 5 issues

Volume 12, 5 issues

Volume 11, 5 issues

Volume 10, 5 issues

Volume 9, 5 issues

Volume 8, 8 issues

Volume 7, 10 issues

Volume 6, 9 issues

Volume 5, 6 issues

Volume 4, 10 issues

Volume 3, 10 issues

Volume 2, 10 issues

Volume 1, 8 issues

The Journal
About the journal
Ethics and policies
Peer-review process
 
Submission guidelines
Submission form
Editorial board
 
Subscriptions
 
ISSN 1559-3959 (online)
ISSN 1559-3959 (print)
 
Author index
To appear
 
Other MSP journals
When beam theories fail

Paul R. Heyliger
Vol. 8 (2013), No. 1, 15–35
DOI: 10.2140/jomms.2013.8.15
Abstract

The free vibration of completely unrestrained prismatic rectangular parallelepipeds and the static response of planar elastic rectangles under transverse loads are examined to determine the relative accuracy of several widely used beam theories. The Euler–Bernoulli, Rayleigh, and Timoshenko theories are applied to both isotropic and orthotropic beams and compared with elasticity-based solutions. The resulting frequencies, energies, displacements, and stresses are compared with solutions to the linear theory of elasticity for solids with the same geometries and material constitutions. Sources of the resulting differences in response are identified, and guidelines are suggested.

Keywords
beam, vibration, elasticity, frequency, Timoshenko, Euler–Bernoulli
Milestones
Received: 2 July 2012
Revised: 15 November 2012
Accepted: 13 January 2013
Published: 28 March 2013
Authors
Paul R. Heyliger
Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering
Colorado State University
Fort Collins, CO 80523-1372
United States