Structural Engineering & Statics
where the load goes
Generator

The collapse mechanism of a propped cantilever

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.
The collapse mechanism of a propped cantilever. A collapse mechanism, with the hinge position found by searching rather than quoted. Every position gives an upper bound on the collapse load; the lowest is 7.29, at a hinge 58.6 per cent along, which is a coefficient of 11.657 times Mp over the square of the span.

The collapse mechanism of a propped cantilever. A collapse mechanism, with the hinge position found by searching rather than quoted. Every position gives an upper bound on the collapse load; the lowest is 7.29, at a hinge 58.6 per cent along, which is a coefficient of 11.657 times Mp over the square of the span.

10 essays call plastic-mechanism. 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.

The collapse mechanism of a propped cantilever. A collapse mechanism, with the hinge position found by searching rather than quoted. Every position gives an upper bound on the collapse load; the lowest is 7.29, at a hinge 58.6 per cent along, which is a coefficient of 11.657 times Mp over the square of the span. Internal forces

After the first yield, which is not the end

A steel beam whose extreme fibre has reached yield has not failed. It has started forming a hinge, and collapse waits until there are enough hinges to make a mechanism.

 Take that one away and the load finds another route. A 6-panel pratt truss under 20 kN at each top node, before and after member 2 is removed. The load redistributes. The worst-affected survivor now carries 2.03 times what it did, and four members that carried nothing before are now working. Whether that is survival depends on how much spare capacity was there, which is a different question from whether the frame was strong enough. Structural form

The structure that survives losing a member

Every check in this collection asks what a structure carries. None of them asks what is left when part of it is gone — and two frames with the same members, the same weight and the same factor of safety can answer that question completely differently.

 A two-way slab is a one-way slab as soon as it is not square. The share of the load carried by the strips spanning the short way, against the ratio of the sides. The two families of strips cross at the centre and must deflect equally there, and a strip's deflection goes as the fourth power of its span — so at a ratio of 1.33 the short strips already take 76% and at 2 they take 94%. The panel drawn here is 6 × 8 m, a ratio of 1.33, and its short strips take 76.0%. Two-way action is worth having at a ratio of one and worth almost nothing by two. Structural form

The slab that spans both ways

A panel supported on four sides sends its load in two directions at once, and the share is decided by a fourth power — so a panel a third longer than it is wide has already stopped being a two-way slab in any useful sense. What it does at collapse is a different calculation with a different answer.

 A truss drawn inside a solid, and solved as one. A deep member 4000 mm between bearings and 2000 mm deep, carrying 1200 kN at mid-span. The model is two struts and one tie, on a lever arm of 1600 mm, and it is solved by the truss solver rather than by a formula: the tie comes back at 750 kN and each strut at 960 kN, at 38.7° to the horizontal. Spread over a strut width of 812 mm the compression is 3.0 N/mm² against a limit of 15.8 for concrete cracked across its own strut, and the tie needs 1724 mm² of steel. A beam calculation on the same member would have asked the tie for 702 kN, which is 7% less than the model does. Internal forces

When there is no section to design

Beam theory needs a section, and a section needs the strain to be linear across it. Within about a depth of a support, a load, a corner or a hole it is not — and those are the regions structures actually fail in.

 The two theorems close on the answer from opposite sides. A pinned-base portal frame under 200 kN at mid-span and 80 kN at the eaves, with a plastic moment of 200 kNm. The three horizontal lines are mechanisms — work equations, each an upper bound: the beam mechanism gives 1.000, sway 1.250 and the combined one 0.714. The curve is the lower bound: for each value of the one redundant, the largest load factor whose moment field stays inside the plastic moment everywhere. Its peak is 0.714, and it touches the lowest mechanism exactly — so the collapse load is known rather than bracketed. Using the beam mechanism instead would have claimed 1.40 times the real capacity, and the sway one 1.75 times, both of them on the wrong side. Equilibrium

Two ways of being wrong

Plastic analysis has two theorems and they point in opposite directions. Any equilibrium field that nowhere exceeds the plastic moment gives a load at or below the collapse load; any mechanism gives one at or above it. Only one of those errors is safe.

 The point the rafter turns about, which is off the frame. A pitched portal of 8 m span and 4.0 m to the eaves, with a 1.5 m rise, collapsing. Each rigid part of the mechanism rotates about some point: the left column about its base hinge, the right about its own. The rafter between them does neither, and its centre is found by one rule — two bodies joined at a hinge share that hinge, so the second body's centre lies on the line through the first body's centre and the hinge, extended. Two hinges give two lines and they cross at (8.0, 11.0) metres, which is 5.5 m above the ridge and outside any drawing of the frame itself. From there the whole collapse is two ratios of lengths and no trigonometry: the load factor is 1.339. Flatten the roof and the centre descends; make the two lines parallel and it goes to infinity, which is the statement that the rafter translates instead of turning. Equilibrium

The point the mechanism turns about

A collapsing frame is a chain of rigid pieces, and every piece is rotating about some point. Find those points and the whole collapse load reads off two ratios of lengths, with no trigonometry anywhere — and for a pitched roof the point in question is well above the top of the drawing.

 Six ways for one dowel to fail, and the capacity is the smallest. Johansen's single-shear mechanisms for a 12 mm dowel through 40 and 40 mm members, each drawn as the shape it is: the dowel straight and the timber crushing, the dowel rotating rigidly, one plastic hinge, then two. The capacity under each is that mechanism's own, and the joint's strength is the smallest — 5.02 kN by mode c, which is the dowel rotates rigidly and both members crush. That is the kinematic theorem of plasticity: every mechanism gives an upper bound and the true collapse is the lowest of them. The crushed timber is shaded, and the circles are plastic hinges in the steel. Connections

The smallest of six failures

Everything else in this collection that fails does so in one way at a time. A dowel through timber does not — the wood can crush while the steel stays straight, or one plastic hinge can form in it, or two — and the capacity is the smallest of the six, which is the kinematic theorem of plasticity applied to a joint rather than to a frame.

 How fast the strain arrived, which a quoted strength does not record. The dynamic increase factor on strength against strain rate, over eight decades. Steel follows Cowper and Symonds' fit, whose constant D = 40.4 s⁻¹ is not an arbitrary parameter — it is the rate at which the material is exactly twice as strong. Concrete in tension follows the model code's two-branch curve and is steeper. The four marked regimes are the argument: a testing machine works at about 10⁻⁴ per second, an earthquake at 5 × 10⁻³, a vehicle impact at a half, a blast at a hundred, and the enhancement across them runs 1.00, 1.08, 1.32, 2.04. So this is a correction that is either negligible or decisive with very little in between, which is why no seismic code carries it and every blast code does. What does not rise is the modulus, which is a lattice property, and the ultimate strength rises only a third as much — so the ultimate-to-yield ratio closes from 1.56 to 1.23 and the material has less warning left in it than it started with. Materials

The steel that is stronger in a millisecond

Every strength quoted anywhere in this collection was measured at about a ten-thousandth of a strain per second, because that is what a testing machine does, and nothing on a drawing says so. Load the same steel a million times faster and its yield stress rises by a third.

 Where the demand crosses the capacity. Base shear against roof displacement for a eight-storey frame pushed with a triangular load pattern. It is elastic to 1994 kN, where the first storey reaches its shear capacity, and flattens as each of the others follows — 7 yield events in the order 3, 4, 2, 1, 5, 6, 7. The demand is a displacement rather than a force: the elastic spectrum at the building's own period of 0.93 s gives 173 mm, and the participation factor of 1.26 makes that 219 mm at roof level. Against an idealised yield of 70 mm that is a ductility demand of 3.10. Dynamics

Pushed over until it will not stand

A structure in an earthquake is asked for a displacement rather than a force. A pushover answers a different question cheaply — how much base shear the frame has against how far its roof moves — and the whole art is in what happens when the two are laid over each other.

 Settling down or walking away, cycle by cycle. The total plastic hinge rotation of the beam after each cycle of loading — span 1, both, span 2, neither — with the midspan load at 0.98, 1.02, 1.05, 1.10 times the shakedown load of 126.3 kN. At 0.98 it stops at 0.59 mrad. At 1.02 it grows 4.57 mrad a cycle. At 1.05 it grows 11.43 mrad a cycle. At 1.10 it grows 22.86 mrad a cycle. Nothing collapses in any single cycle; above the shakedown load the beam walks. Materials

The load it can carry once

A two-span beam whose loads come and go span by span collapses at 150 kN under any one arrangement, and walks at 127. Between the two it can carry every arrangement once and none of them forever: each cycle leaves a few more milliradians of rotation at the support and a midspan fifteen millimetres lower. Melan's theorem finds the limit as the last residual moment line that fits, Koiter's as a mechanism no single load state can drive, and a cycle-by-cycle calculation walks exactly where both say it will.

The library, page 4 of 7 — where plastic-mechanism sits