arXiv:1812.09164 [physics.

class-ph]

Large deflections and stability of spring-hinged cantilever beam

Milan Batista

University of Ljubljana, Slovenia

[email protected]

(Nov-Dec 2018)

Abstract

In the article, we investigate the influence of spring on the large deflections and stability
of a spring-hinged cantilever subject to conservative tip force. Using the closed form
solution of the equilibrium equation and closed form solution of Jacobi accessory
equation, we determine the beam equilibrium forms and their stability. Also, the
solution for spring-hinged cantilever bema subject to a follower force is given. Results
are present in the graphical and the tabular form.

Keywords. Elastic beams; elastic support; large deformations; stability; Jacobi test;

1 Introduction

Cantilever beam represents one of the most common construction element in

mechanical and civil engineering [1-3], and in recent decades also in robotics [4], and in
micro- and nano-engineering [5-8]. Therefore, because of its importance, the study of
the large deflection and stability of a cantilever beam has attracted numerous
researches. Most of the works are devoted to clamped cantilever beam (see [9-14] and
reference therein). For the spring-hinged cantilever beam subject to a conservative force
the literature is not extensive. A discussion of the stability of a spring-hinged cantilever
beam is given in books [15, 16] where one can find the derivation of the formula for the
buckling force using Euler’s method. Rao and Raju [17] analyses the post-buckling
behavior of the spring-hinged cantilever beam using the finite element method. Ohtsuki
and Yasui [18] solve the large deflection of the spring-hinged cantilever beam under
inclined force using elliptic integrals. These authors enhance their calculations with
bending tests. Rao and Raju [19] calculate critical load parameter for the cantilever
under axial force and distributed load using semi-analytic Rayleigh-Ritz method.
Another possible force acting on the cantilever is a follower force on which, especially
24/12/2018 08:50
arXiv:1812.09164 [physics.class-ph]

for pure compressive one, there are different opinions [20-22]. Large deflections of a
spring-supported cantilever subject to follower force using elliptic integrals were
considered by Rao et all [23]. Rao and Rao [24] examine large deflections of a spring-
hinged tapered cantilever beam subject to a rotational distributed loading using Runge-
Kutta numerical integration. Shvartsman [25] considers large bending of a spring-
supported cantilever subject to follower force using numerical integration. For
treatment of stability of the cantilever beam under a follower force using dynamical
methods, we refer to [26, 27] and especially for spring-hinged cantilever beam to [28-
31]. For other elastically supported cases of beams, see [32-34].

From the available literature, we conclude that the stability of post-buckling

forms of the spring-hinged column beam has not yet been reported. Therefore, in this
study, we aim to fill this gap. In the next section, we set up the governing equations
of the problem using the principle of minimum total potential energy. The first
variation of this energy leads to Euler equilibrium equation and its second variation to
Jacobi accessory equation [35] which is used for accessing the equilibrium stability. In
Section 3 we give the solution of these equations in terms of Jacobi elliptic function.
Then in Section 4 we provide some numerical examples and discuss the cantilever in
compression in some details. Cantilever subject to a follower force is discussed in
Section 5. Finally, the results are summarized in the last section.

Figure 1. Geometry and load of the spring-hinged cantilever beam

2 Problem formulation

We consider an elastic spring-hinged cantilever beam subject to force F.. The

cantilever length is  , its flexural rigidity is EI , the rotational spring stiffness is c,
and the force inclination angle is  (Fig 1).

2.1 Basic equations

24/12/2018 08:50
arXiv:1812.09164 [physics.class-ph]

The differential equations of the column base curve are

dx dy
  cos  ,   sin  (1)
ds ds

in which 0  s   is the arc length measured from column free end to its fixed end,
x , y are the base curve coordinates,  is the tangent angle. The conditions at the
fixed end are x    y    0 . Using this we obtain from (1) the coordinates
x 0  x 0 and y 0  y 0 of the free end

 
x0  0
cos  ds , y0  
0
sin  ds . (2)

The expression for the cantilever total potential energy  is

1
  1
EI 2ds  F cos    x 0   F sin  y 0  21 c 12 (3)
0 2

where 1     and  is the base curve curvature given by

d
 (4)
ds

For the equilibrium,  is to be minimum [16]. This means that the first variation of
 must vanish and the second variation of  need to be positive. Below, we will for
the derivation of the governing equations of the problems follows the well-known
variational procedure [35].

The first variation of  as given by (3) is, using (2),


EI    F sin       ds  c  
  0   1 1
(5)

d 
where  is variation of  and    . After integration by parts and using (4)
ds
for  , we obtain

  d 2 
  EI     EI 2  F sin      ds  c 1 1 (6)
 ds
0 0


By making   0 , we obtain the differential equation

d 2
EI  F sin      0 (7)
ds 2

24/12/2018 08:50
arXiv:1812.09164 [physics.class-ph]

and boundary conditions. In our case these are

  0  0 , EI     c 1  0 (8)

Thus, the cantilever equilibrium forms are solutions of second order ordinary
differential equation (7) subject to boundary conditions (8).

The second variation of  as given by (3) is

  d 2 
 
2
 2   EI     EI 2  F cos        ds  c 1 (9)
0 0
 ds 

The condition  2   0 leads to the Jacobi accessory equation

d 2
EI 2  F cos       0 (10)
ds

and the following boundary conditions that are consistent with conditions (8)

0  0 , EI  s   c s   0 (11)

We recall that by the Jacobi test the equilibrium shape of the beam is unstable if any
nontrivial solution of (10) under the boundary conditions (11) has a solution (conjugate
points) in 0  s   .

3 Solution

In the following, we will use Jacobian elliptic functions sn x , k  , cn x , k  , dn x , k  ,

 x, k   
x
Jacobi’s epsilon function dn2 t, k dt and the complete elliptic integral of
0

the first kind K k  . Also, we will use the following derived Jacobian elliptic function
sd x , k   sn x , k  dn x , k  and cd x , k   cn x , k  dn x , k  [36].

3.1 Equilibrium

We introduce the following non-dimensional parameters

F 2 c
2  , 2  (12)
EI EI

24/12/2018 08:50
arXiv:1812.09164 [physics.class-ph]

and from here on we use  as a unit of length so we have 0  s  1 . We note that  2

represent non-dimensional force. However, in diagrams and tables, we will use
normalized force

F 2
 2 (13)
FE 

EI
where FE   2 is Euler critical force for buckling of a pin-ended column.
2

By using (12) the equation (7) and boundary conditions (8) become

d 2
  2 sin      0 , (14)
ds 2

  0  0 ,  1   2 1  0 . (15)

The solution of (14) is [14, 37-39]

    2 sin1 k sn s  C , k  (16)

 

where C is a constant of integration and k is the elliptic modulus. The base curve
curvature is determined from (4)

  2k  cn s  C , k  , (17)

Using (17) for  and (16) for  we from the boundary conditions (15) obtain the
relations

cn C , k   0 (18)

 k
  sin1 k sn   C , k   2 cn   C , k   0 (19)
2   

From these we find

C  K k  (20)

 k 1  k2 
  sin k cd , k  
1   sd , k   0 (21)
2   2

24/12/2018 08:50
arXiv:1812.09164 [physics.class-ph]

In this way, we reduce the problem to solving the equation (21) for unknown k. This
can be done numerically. Finally, substituting (16) for  into (1) and perform
integration, we obtain the coordinates of the points of the beam base curve

x   cos    sin  , y   sin    cos  (22)

where

2
    C , k    s  C , k   1  s  , (23)
 

2k  cn s  C , k   cn   C , k  .
   (24)


3.2 Stability

Using (12) we obtain from (10) and (11) the Jacobi’s accessory equation in the
following form ([35])

d 2
2
  2 cos       0 (25)
ds

where    . The corresponded boundary conditions (11) become

d d  2 

 0  0 ,      sc   0 . (26)
ds  ds 

The solution of (25) has the form [40]

 s   C 11 s   C 2 2 s  (27)

where C 1 , C 2 are constant of integration and


1   2k cn s  C , k  , (28)
C

 2
2  
k 1  k 2

sn s  C , k  dn s  C , k 
, (29)
  s  C , k   1  k s  C  cn s  C , k 

  2
 
 
Substituting (27) into boundary conditions (26), we obtain a homogeneous system of
equations for C 1 and C 2 which has a non-trivial solution if it’s determinate vanish.
This condition leads to the following equation for sc

24/12/2018 08:50
arXiv:1812.09164 [physics.class-ph]

 s , k   1  k 2 s   sn s , k    cd s , k  

 c   c   c
2
c 
  , (30)

 
cn sc , k  dn sc , k   1  k 2 2 sn sc , k   0


where we omit the factor k . By Jacobi’s test [35], the necessary condition for  2   0
is that the smallest root of this equation is sc  1 . Therefore, on the other hand, if
0  sc  1 then the beam shape is unstable. We note that  dropped from the stability
analysis. This should be clear from the expressions for the beam coordinates (22): 
affect only the rod position but not its shape.

As a verification of the above equations, we consider the case  2   (clamped

cantilever). In this case, the equation (21) reduces to well-known cn , k   0 , so
  2n  1 K k  where n is an integer. Also, the equation (30) becomes the equation
for cantilever given in [40] (Eq 21 therein. In this equation first sign – should be +).

4 Examples

With the above solution, we can easily construct various bifurcation diagrams, load-
deflection diagrams and calculate a deformed beam shape. The stability of the beam
shapes can be treated by a numerical solution of (30) using the procedure described in
[41]. For all numerical calculations with elliptic functions we use Elfun18 library [42].

To verify the present solution, we compare our calculations of the beam free end
coordinates, and the tangent angle at the beam ends with those from [18]. The results
are given in Table 1 where we can observe scatter but acceptable difference within 10%
in all cases except that of  2  1 where the difference is up to 20%. The comparison
is also shown in Fig 2.

Table 1. Numerical values for column shapes shown in Fig 3.  2  34.69 ,    4

F 2 [18] Present Relative difference %

EI x 0  y0  0 0 10 x0  y0  0 0 10 x 0  y0  0 0 10
1 0.951 0.258 25.1 1.2 0.93611 0.32338 28.013 1.471 1.6 -20.2 -10.4 -18.4
2 0.750 0.601 59.5 3.0 0.72701 0.62366 59.184 3.155 3.2 -3.6 0.5 -4.9
2.9 0.561 0.752 84.0 4.8 0.53216 0.75927 78.919 4.374 5.4 -1.0 6.4 9.7
6.8 0.099 0.856 114.8 7.5 0.09051 0.86115 113.691 7.558 9.4 -0.6 1.0 -0.8
11.2 -0.105 0.842 126.6 10.2 -0.10100 0.84792 125.142 9.770 4.0 -0.7 1.2 4.4

24/12/2018 08:50
arXiv:1812.09164 [physics.class-ph]

Figure 2. Free end tangent angle as a function of normalized force. Dotted line
represent an unstable solution branch. Bright dots are values from [18]. Critical
normalized force is 5.6071, corresponding free end angle is -130.0120 (black dot)

As an example of the application of the present solution, we consider the case

   2 2 and    4 . The bifurcation diagram for the case is shown in Fig 3. Each
2

dk
branch start where  0 , or, using (21),
d
 
1  1  sn , k    cd , k   0 , (31)
 
 2  2

The start point of branch is thus the solution of the system of equations (21) and (31).
For each branch we have two solutions, i.e., each branch is split into two parts one for
k  0 (upper) and one for k  0 (lower). We see from the figure that only the first
branch can be stable; all other branches are unstable. The upper part of the first branch
that emerges from the initial beam straight state is entirely stable (Fig 4). The other,
lower part, can be reached only by applying a force higher than a critical one to some
pre-deformed shape (Fig 5). Note, that this part is unstable from point A to B (see Fig
d
3). The stationary point of the lower part is where 0 . This condition, using (21),
dk
leads to an equation which the same as equation (30) for sc  1 , i.e., the stationary

24/12/2018 08:50
arXiv:1812.09164 [physics.class-ph]

point lie on the boundary of the stable region. We thus obtain the critical value of 
and k by a solution of the system of equations (21) and (30).

We obtain a similar behavior also for other values of  2 and  , and for  2   we
obtain the solution for the clamped beam which is discussed in [41]. Thus, we conclude
that in general, only the first branch of the spring-hinged cantilever beam can be stable,
all others are unstable.

Figure 3. Bifurcation diagram with two solution branches. All dotted lines are for the
clamped cantilever beam. Tiny lines are for d  dk  0 . The start point A of the lower
part of the first branch is at 0.88888, 0.33870 . This part of the branch becomes
stable after passing the point B which is at 0.63713, 0.66276 .

Table 2. Numerical values for the beam shapes shown in Fig 4.  2   2 2 ,    4

  k F FE x0  y0  0 0 10
0.25 0.55357 0.0625 0.95367 0.28915 22.224 6.294
0.5 0.90653 0.25 0.38751 0.87127 85.062 25.499
0.75 0.98578 0.5625 -0.06172 0.92742 115.655 39.457
1 0.99770 1 -0.27987 0.88885 127.221 49.345

24/12/2018 08:50
arXiv:1812.09164 [physics.class-ph]

Table 3. Numerical values for column shapes shown in Fig 5.  2   2 2 ,    4

  k F FE x0  y0  0 0 10
0.63714 -0.66642 0.40595* -0.06048 -0.86397 -128.583 -30.412
0.75 -0.92533 0.5625 -0.60967 -0.49959 -180.436 -50.558
1 -0.99022 1 -0.77905 -0.09016 -208.963 -70.431
* the critical force.

Figure 4. Stable equilibrium shapes for various values of F FE . Dotted lines

correspond shapes for the clamped cantilever.

Figure 5. Stable equilibrium shapes for various values of F FE . Dotted lines

correspond forms for the clamped cantilever.

24/12/2018 08:50
arXiv:1812.09164 [physics.class-ph]

Figure 6. Critical force Fc FE versus spring stiffness  2 . F FE  1 4 as  2   .

For the last example, we consider the spring-hinged cantilever beam under pure
compression. From the graph of the critical force in Fig 6, we see that the effect of
spring become relatively small for say  2  40 wherever it becomes less than 5% of
critical force for the clamped beam. We can see from the graph in Fig 7 that after
buckling, the beam continues to support load, i.e., the force still increases with
increasing deflection. From the bifurcation diagram in Fig 8, we see that only the first
buckled form is stable. All other shapes are unstable. Some stable shapes are shown in
Fig 9.

24/12/2018 08:50
arXiv:1812.09164 [physics.class-ph]

Figure 7. Load-deflection diagram for beam under compression for various values of
normalized spring stiffness  2 .

Figure 8. Bifurcation diagram with the first two branches for the cantilever beam
under pure compression.

24/12/2018 08:50
arXiv:1812.09164 [physics.class-ph]

Figure 9. Equilibrium shapes for various values of F FE for data given in Table 4.

Table 4. Numerical values for column shapes shown in Fig 9.  2   2 .

k  F FE    1  x0  y0 
0 1.427187* 0.206377 0 0
0.3 1.461077 0.216295 0.100091 0.406231
0.6 1.590929 0.256449 0.417597 0.744692
0.9 2.073437 0.435594 1.067300 0.849782
* critical value

Trough we demonstrate the stability of the beam with the graphs, two cases can
be treated analytically. The first case is a straight beam and the second is the case of
small deflections.

The solution of (21) corresponds to the straight form is k  0 . In this case we

from (16), (17), (23), (24) obtain.

  0,   0, x  1s , y0 (32)

To determine straight form stability, we consider (30) which for k  0 reduce to


 sin sc   cos sc   0 (33)
2

24/12/2018 08:50
arXiv:1812.09164 [physics.class-ph]

 2 
1 1  
The solution to this equation is sc  tan   . For sc  1 it becomes the well-
   

known characteristic equation for the critical value c of  [16]

 2  c tan c (34)

Thus, the straight beam is stable for   c . In particular case  2  0 (no spring)
then c  0 , i.e., the straight beam is unstable. If  2   (clamped end) then
c   2 . Graph of (34) is shown in Fig 7.

For small k, i.e., small deflection, we obtain from (20), (21)


C 
2
O k2   (35)

 
0
 1  2 k2 O k4
12
  (36)

where

2 
 
304  5  6 2  2 02  3 6 1   2   (37)
 2
0
 4  2
0
 4  2 
and 0 is solution of

0
 sin 0  cos 0  0 (38)
2

Future from (16), (17), (23), (24) we have

  2k cos 0s   O k 3   (39)

  2k 0 sin 0s   O k 3   (40)

x  1  s O k2   (41)

2k
y
0 sin 0  sin 0s   O k
  3
  (42)

To assess the stability of small deflection, we substitute sc  1 into (30) and expand
it into a power series of k. In this way we obtain

24/12/2018 08:50
arXiv:1812.09164 [physics.class-ph]

c 2
0
1
4
k2 O k4  (43)

Comparing (36) and (43) we find that   c , i.e., the initial deflected form is stable.

5. Follower force

We obtain a solution for large deflection of the rod under follower force by setting [21]

    0 (44)

where 0 is the free end tangent angle, and  is the angle between force and base curve
tangent at the rod free end. Substituting this into the expression (16) for  and set
s  0 yield


k  sin (45)
2

Substituting (44) into the characteristic equation, (21) we obtain the following formula
for free end tangent angle

2k 1  k 2 
0    2 sin k cd , k  
1
sd , k  (46)
  2

For each  and  we can thus calculate k from (45), 0 from (46) and  from (44).
In words: the problem has a unique solution, i.e., an equilibrium form of the spring-
hinged cantilever under a follow force is unique. This generalizes results given in [21]
where  2   and   0 .

d 0
The angle 0 reaches stationary value when  0 . From this condition, we
d
deduce the following equation

sd , k    cd , k    2 sn , k   0 . (47)

For example, when  2   then (47) reduces to sn , k   0 . The smallest positive
root of this equation is   2K k  . For    2 this gives   3.70815 or
Fc  13.75037 . This value differs from Shvartsman’s [25] by less than 0.3%. We note
that when   2K k  then cn , k   1 and dn , k   1 so (46) reduce to 0  2 ,

24/12/2018 08:50
arXiv:1812.09164 [physics.class-ph]

i.e., value which is independent of  2 . This can be observed in Fig 10. To obtain the
value of  2 for which 0,max  2 we substitute  2 from (47) into (46). A solution of
the resulting equation gives   2.52909 and thus  2  0.74324 .

Figure 10. Free end tangent angle as a function of normalized follower force for
various values of normalized spring stiffness  2 . F FE  0.64807 as  2  0

Table 5. Numerical values for beam shapes shown in Fig 11 .  2   2 2    2

  k F FE x0  y0  0 0 10
0.25 0.0625 0.94249 0.32144 24.710 7.094
0.5 0.25 0.33137 0.87781 92.127 24.778
2 2
0.75 0.5625 -0.34491 0.68558 163.135 34.097
1 1 -0.28124 0.48360 191.425 20.612

24/12/2018 08:50
arXiv:1812.09164 [physics.class-ph]

Figure 11. Equilibrium shapes of a spring-supported cantilever for various values of

follower force. Dotted lines are for the corresponded clamped cantilever beam.

Conclusions

For the spring-hinged cantilever beam under a pure compression force, we prove
that its first buckled mode is unconditionally stable in the sense that the beam after
buckling retains its loading capacity; all higher buckled modes are unstable. The spring-
hinged cantilever beam under inclined force has two stable equilibrium solutions. One
completely stable emerges from the initial state, and the other, partly stable is reached
from a pre-deformed state. We also give an analytical solution for the cantilever subject
to a follower force.

In the end, we add that an advantage of a closed form analytical solution of the
problem, compared to other methods, is that we have on our disposal an exact ‘big
picture’ of the solution, i.e., whole phase plane on which we can relatively easily
determine equilibrium conditions and its stability.

24/12/2018 08:50
arXiv:1812.09164 [physics.class-ph]

References

[1] C. Petersen, Statik und Stabilität der Baukonstruktionen elasto- und plasto-
statische Berechnungsverfahren druckbeanspruchter Tragwerke Nachweisformen
gegen Knicken, Kippen, Beulen, 2., durchgesehene Aufl. ed., Vieweg, Braunschweig
etc., 1982.
[2] R. Narayanan, Steel framed structures : stability and strength, Elsevier Applied
Science Publishers, London ; New York, 1985.
[3] R. Kindmann, Stabilititat und Theorie II. Ordnung, 4. Auflage. ed., Ernst &
Sohn, Berlin, 2008.
[4] G.H. Gao, H. Wang, Q.X. Xia, M.Y. Song, H. Ren, Study on the load capacity of
a single-section continuum manipulator, Mech Mach Theory, 104 (2016) 313-326.
[5] M. Chaudhary, A. Gupta, Microcantilever-based Sensors, Defence Sci J, 59 (2009)
634-641.
[6] C. Li, L.Q. Yao, W.Q. Chen, S. Li, Comments on nonlocal effects in nano-
cantilever beams, Int J Eng Sci, 87 (2015) 47-57.
[7] C.C. Liu, Dynamic behavior analysis of cantilever-type nano-mechanical
electrostatic actuator, Int J Nonlinear Mech, 82 (2016) 124-130.
[8] D. Kalafut, A. Bajaj, A. Raman, Multistability of cantilever MEMS/NEMS
switches induced by electrostatic and surface forces, Int J Nonlinear Mech, 95 (2017)
209-215.
[9] S. Timoshenko, Theory of elastic stability, 2d ed., McGraw-Hill, New York,, 1961.
[10] R. Frisch-Fay, Flexible bars, Butterworths, London, 1962.
[11] H. Ziegler, Principles of structural stability, ed.2 ed., Birkhäuser, Basel Stuttgart,
1977.
[12] E.P. Popov, Theory and Calculation of Flexible Elastic Bars Nauka, Moscow,
1986.
[13] Y.V. Zakharov, K.G. Okhotkin, A.D. Skorobogatov, Bending of Bars under a
Follower Load, Journal of Applied Mechanics and Technical Physics, 45 (2004) 756-
763.
[14] M. Batista, Analytical treatment of equilibrium configurations of cantilever
under terminal loads using Jacobi elliptical functions, Int J Solids Struct, 51 (2014)
2308-2326.
[15] A.R. Rzhanitsyn, Stability Of Equilibrium Of Elastic Systems, State Publishing
of technical-theoretical literature, Moscow, 1955.

24/12/2018 08:50
arXiv:1812.09164 [physics.class-ph]

[16] N.A. Alfutov, Stability of elastic structures, Springer, Berlin, 2000.

[17] G.V. Rao, P.C. Raju, Post-Buckling Analysis of Spring-Hinged Cantilever
Columns, Comput Struct, 10 (1979) 495-497.
[18] A. Ohtsuki, T. Yasui, Analysis of Large Deflections in Spring-Hinged Cantilever
Beam under Inclined Tip Load, Transactions of the Japan Society of Mechanical
Engineers Series A, 60 (1994) 2100-2106.
[19] G.V. Rao, K.K. Raju, Stability of spring-hinged cantilever column under
combined concentrated and distributed loads, Aiaa J, 40 (2002) 1687-1689.
[20] W.T. Koiter, Unrealistic follower forces, J Sound Vib, 194 (1996) 636-636.
[21] S.S. Antman, Nonlinear problems of elasticity, 2nd ed., Springer, New York,
2005.
[22] I. Elishakoff, Controversy Associated With the So-Called “Follower Forces”:
Critical Overview, Applied Mechanics Reviews, 58 (2005) 117-142.
[23] B.N. Rao, G.L.N. Babu, G.V. Rao, Large Deflection Analysis of a Spring Hinged
Cantilever Beam Subjected to a Tip Concentrated Rational Load, Z Angew Math
Mech, 67 (1987) 519-520.
[24] B.N. Rao, G.V. Rao, Large Deflections of a Spring-Hinged Tapered Cantilever
Beam with a Rotational Distributed Loading, Aeronaut J, 91 (1987) 429-437.
[25] B.S. Shvartsman, Large deflections of a cantilever beam subjected to a follower
force, J Sound Vib, 304 (2007) 969-973.
[26] V.V. Bolotin, Nonconservative problems of the theory of elastic stability,
Corrected and authorized ed., Pergamon, Oxford, 1963.
[27] D. Bigoni, O.N. Kirillov, D. Misseroni, G. Noselli, M. Tommasini, Flutter and
divergence instability in the Pfluger column: Experimental evidence of the Ziegler
destabilization paradox, J Mech Phys Solids, 116 (2018) 99-116.
[28] G.V. Rao, R.V.N. Rao, Stability of Spring-Hinged Cantilever Columns Subjected
to Follower Forces-A Galerkin Finite Element Solution, Comput Struct, 5 (1975) 261-
262.
[29] R.C. Kar, T. Sujata, Parametric-Instability of an Elastically Restrained
Cantilever Beam, Comput Struct, 34 (1990) 469-475.
[30] A. Guran, R.H. Plaut, Stability of a Column with a Follower Load and a Load-
Dependent Elastic Support, Acta Mech, 97 (1993) 205-214.
[31] G.V. Sankaran, G.V. Rao, Stability of tapered cantilever columns subjected to
follower forces, Comput Struct, 6 (1976) 217-220.

24/12/2018 08:50
arXiv:1812.09164 [physics.class-ph]

[32] G.J. Simitses, D.H. Hodges, Fundamentals of structural stability, Elsevier,

Amsterdam, 2006.
[33] R. Mahnken, Lehrbuch der Technischen Mechanik - Elastostatik mit einer
Einführung in Hybridstrukturen, Springer Vieweg, Berlin, 2015.
[34] V.B. Glavardanov, R.B. Maretic, M.M. Zigic, N.M. Grahovac, Secondary
bifurcation of a shearable rod with nonlinear spring supports, Eur J Mech a-Solid, 66
(2017) 433-445.
[35] C. Fox, An introduction to the calculus of variations, Oxford University Press,
London,, 1954.
[36] W.P. Reinhardt, P.L. Walker, Jacobian Elliptic Functions, in: F.W.J. Olver
(Ed.) NIST handbook of mathematical functions, Cambridge University Press :
NIST, Cambridge ; New York, 2010, pp. xv, 951 p.
[37] A.E.H. Love, A treatise on the mathematical theory of elasticity, 4th ed., Dover
Publications, New York, 1944.
[38] V.G.A. Goss, Snap buckling, writhing and loop formation in twisted rods, in:
Center for Nonlinear Dynamics, University Collage London, 2003.
[39] M. Batista, A closed-form solution for Reissner planar finite-strain beam using
Jacobi elliptic functions, Int J Solids Struct, 87 (2016) 153-166.
[40] M. Batista, A simplified method to investigate the stability of cantilever rod
equilibrium forms, Mech Res Commun, 67 (2015) 13-17.
[41] M. Batista, On stability of elastic rod planar equilibrium configurations, Int J
Solids Struct, 72 (2015) 144-152.
[42] M. Batista, Elfun18 A collection of Matlab functions for the computation of
Elliptical Integrals and Jacobian elliptic functions of real arguments,
arXiv:1806.10469 [cs.MS], (2018).

24/12/2018 08:50