Generator

Two shapes that are the wrong way up for each other

Rendered here at the parameters it defaults to, with every essay that calls it — which is the same list as the blast radius of changing it.
Two shapes that are the wrong way up for each other. Deflected shapes of a 20-storey building under a uniform wind, drawn to the same scale. The wall alone bends: its shape is flattest at the base and steepest at the top, reaching 146 mm. The frame alone shears: it is steepest at the base where the storey shear is largest, reaching 140 mm. Tied together at every floor they reach 58 mm — less than a quarter of either, and less than the 72 mm two springs in parallel would give, because each is stiff exactly where the other is not.

Two shapes that are the wrong way up for each other. Deflected shapes of a 20-storey building under a uniform wind, drawn to the same scale. The wall alone bends: its shape is flattest at the base and steepest at the top, reaching 146 mm. The frame alone shears: it is steepest at the base where the storey shear is largest, reaching 140 mm. Tied together at every floor they reach 58 mm — less than a quarter of either, and less than the 72 mm two springs in parallel would give, because each is stiff exactly where the other is not.

7 essays call lateral-system. The drawing above is what it returns with no arguments at all; every call below passes it something, because a placement that passes nothing draws whichever member of the family the generator happens to default to rather than the one its essay argues about.

Where it is called

Changing this generator changes every one of these figures.

Two shapes that are the wrong way up for each other. Deflected shapes of a 20-storey building under a uniform wind, drawn to the same scale. The wall alone bends: its shape is flattest at the base and steepest at the top, reaching 146 mm. The frame alone shears: it is steepest at the base where the storey shear is largest, reaching 140 mm. Tied together at every floor they reach 58 mm — less than a quarter of either, and less than the 72 mm two springs in parallel would give, because each is stiff exactly where the other is not. Structural form

How a tall building stands still

A shear wall bends and a framed tube shears, and the two deflected shapes are the wrong way up for each other. Tie them together at every floor and the pair is stiffer than the sum of their stiffnesses — because near the base the wall holds the frame back and near the top the frame holds the wall.

A couple applied to the core, and two columns to make it. A 20-storey core with one outrigger at 59% of its height. The arm is stiff in bending and the perimeter columns are stiff in tension and compression, so between them they resist the core's rotation at that level — a couple of 35283 kNm here, carried as a 294 kN pair in the columns at 120 m centres. The compatibility is one equation: the core's rotation at that level, less what the couple takes back out of it, equals the rotation the arm and its columns allow. The top drift falls from 360 mm to 74, which is 80% of it, and the base moment from 73500 to 38217 kNm. The deflected shape is drawn hugely exaggerated: the real top drift is about one five-hundredth of the height. Structural form

The arm that makes the columns work

The perimeter columns of a tall building are already there, already carrying gravity, and already the furthest thing from the centre. They take almost none of the overturning, because a floor slab transmits shear and not moment — and one storey-deep arm at the right height changes that by nearly a half.

One drift, two motions, opposite curvatures. The sideways movement of a 120 m building under a uniform wind, drawn as the sum of the two mechanisms that produce it. The bending curve is a cantilever's: flat at the base, steepening upward, concave one way. The racking curve is a stack of parallelograms: steepest at the base and flattening, concave the other. They add to 366 mm at the roof, of which 61% is bending. The one group that decides the split is αH = H√(GA/EI) = 2.48: below one the racking dominates and the building behaves as a frame, above about six the bending does and it behaves as a cantilever, and everything interesting is in between. Deflection

Two motions with one name

A tall building's sway is two movements added. A frame racks like a stack of parallelograms, worst at the bottom; a cantilever bends about its base, worst at the top. The total at roof level says nothing about which storey is worst, and on this building it is neither.

Two cantilevers, or one wall, and the beams decide which. The deflected shape of a coupled pair of 6 m walls, drawn against the two limits it lies between. Release the coupling beams entirely and the pair is two independent cantilevers, deflecting 111 mm. Make them rigid and it is one composite wall of the full width, deflecting 16 mm — 6.8 times stiffer, because the lever arm between the wall centroids is 8.40 m and everything inside either wall is smaller than that. Real beams of 600 × 350 mm over a 2.4 m opening land at 23 mm and carry 63% of the base overturning as an axial couple rather than as wall bending. The degree of coupling never reaches one, because a beam of finite depth cannot suppress the walls' curvature entirely. Internal forces

Two walls that agreed to be one

A pair of shear walls with a row of doors between them is the commonest lateral system there is, and it has two readings that differ by a factor of seven. What decides which one applies is a beam 600 mm deep over a 2.4 m opening — and most of the overturning ends up as an axial couple that no bending diagram contains.

The force falls, the drift rises, and the damping goes the wrong way. What a compliant foundation does to a 0.6 s building on a 8 × 8 m footing, against the stiffness of the ground under it. Three curves, all normalised to the fixed-base answer. The period lengthens — 1.31 times at 200 m/s — because the swaying and rocking of the foundation are flexibilities in series with the structure's own, and the rocking term carries an h², so it is the tall building that feels it. The base shear falls with the period, which is why a fixed base is usually called conservative. The displacement rises, by 51% here, and that is what breaks the cladding, the services and the gap to the building next door. And the effective damping falls rather than rises: the structure's own is divided by the cube of the lengthening — 2.2% of an original 5% — while a slender building's foundation radiates only 0.28% back, because rocking radiates almost nothing at these frequencies. Dynamics

The ground is a spring

Every dynamic result in this collection has assumed a structure rising from something that does not move. Nothing does. A foundation can slide and it can rock, both are flexibilities in series with the structure's own, and the rocking one carries a square of the height — so the period lengthens, the force falls, the drift rises, and the damping goes the wrong way.

The check that everything adds up, and the error it cannot see. Four versions of the same 2-bay, 3-storey frame, with the global equilibrium residual each one produces — the sum of the reactions against the sum of the applied loads, as a fraction of the applied total. It is the first thing every analysis prints and it is worth having: a lost restraint and a load entered in the wrong unit both show up immediately, at 6% and 24%, because both change what the structure is carrying. The fourth bar is the point. A member whose stiffness is wrong by a factor of ten redistributes the internal forces completely — the second bar shows the change in the member forces, 18% — and the global residual is exactly zero, because the wrong answer is still in equilibrium with the same loads. Equilibrium is one equation per degree of freedom of the whole body, and a stiffness error lives entirely in the many equations underneath it. A model can satisfy every equilibrium check ever devised and be a model of a different structure. Stability

The stiffness the load takes away

Buckling is usually taught as an event — a critical load, a bifurcation, a mode. Written as a matrix it stops being an event at all. A compressive load subtracts a stiffness from the structure, the subtraction grows with the load, and the critical load is simply where what is left reaches zero.

What the second, third and fourth arms are worth. Top drift removed against the number of outriggers, each arrangement at its own optimum levels, on a 40-storey core 200 m tall. One arm at 59 per cent of the height removes 82.3 per cent of the drift. A second, with both moved to 35 and 71, takes it to 91.6 — a gain of 9.3 points, which is half of what was left. The third is worth 3.0 and the fourth 1.5, and each one costs a storey of the building's most valuable height. Structural form

What the second arm is worth

One outrigger at its best height removes five sixths of a tall core's drift, which sounds like the end of the argument. A second removes half of what is left, a third half of that, and each of them costs a storey of the most valuable floor area in the building — so the question is not where to put an outrigger but how many the arithmetic still justifies.

The library, page 3 of 7 — where lateral-system sits