Propped cantilever — central point load#

A propped cantilever is a beam clamped at one end (x = 0) and simply supported at the other (x = L). The extra support makes the problem statically indeterminate — the four reactions (R_A, M_A, R_B, plus the compatibility constraint on displacement at B) cannot be solved from statics alone; one integration step of the Euler–Bernoulli equation provides the missing compatibility equation.

Under a central point load \(P\) at \(x = L/2\):

\[\begin{split}\delta_{\text{mid}} &= \frac{7 P L^{3}}{768 E I}, \\ R_A &= \frac{11 P}{16} \text{ (fixed end)}, \\ R_B &= \frac{5 P}{16} \text{ (simple end)}, \\ M_A &= -\frac{3 P L}{16} \text{ (fixed-end moment)}.\end{split}\]

The 11/16 + 5/16 partition is the classic fingerprint of the propped cantilever — the fixed end carries more of the load than the simple end by a factor of 2.2.

Problem#

Parameter

Value

Length L

1.0 m

Cross-section

0.05 m × 0.05 m (square)

Young’s modulus E

200 GPa

Central load P

1 000 N

Expected δ_mid

7 P / (768 E I) = 8.75 × 10⁻⁵ m

femorph-solver result#

Ran by tests/validation/test_propped_cantilever.py on an SOLID185 enhanced-strain hex mesh. BCs:

  • x = 0: full all-DOF clamp on the left face.

  • x = L: knife-edge roller at the bottom line (UZ = 0 along the full width), with UY = 0 pinned at one corner to kill the lateral rigid-body mode. UX left free so axial strain isn’t locked.

The central load is lumped across the mid-span bottom-line nodes; mid-span deflection is extracted from the top-face centerline (same as the static SS + CC beam problems, to avoid the local-load 3D stress-concentration indentation).

Refinement

Mesh (nx × ny × nz)

δ_mid (m)

Error vs Euler–Bernoulli

Coarse

20 × 3 × 3

8.713 × 10⁻⁵

−0.43 %

Medium

40 × 3 × 3

8.809 × 10⁻⁵

+0.68 %

Refined

80 × 3 × 3

8.843 × 10⁻⁵

+1.07 %

The ~1 % positive drift at fine-mesh convergence is the same 3D Poisson contribution the SS and CC beam problems exhibit — a solid-mesh beam picks up curvature from transverse normal stresses that pure Euler–Bernoulli ignores.

Cross-references#

Source

Reported δ_mid (m)

Problem ID / location

Closed form (Gere & Goodno)

8.75 × 10⁻⁵

§10.3 Table 10-1 Case 6

Timoshenko (1955)

8.75 × 10⁻⁵

SoM Part I §5.8

femorph-solver (refined)

8.843 × 10⁻⁵

test_propped_cantilever.py

MAPDL Verification Manual

8.75 × 10⁻⁵

VM-41 family (propped cantilever)

Abaqus Verification Manual

8.75 × 10⁻⁵

AVM 1.5.x propped-cantilever family

Source#

Problem class: femorph_solver.validation.problems.ProppedCantileverCentralLoad.

Backing regression test: tests/validation/test_propped_cantilever.py.