Structural Engineering & Statics
where the load goes
Theme

Geometry beats material — page 5

Essays 97 to 120 of 329 on this thread, in the same order.
Held up by a pressure nobody can feel. An air-supported roof of 60 m span and 9 m rise. The membrane has no bending stiffness whatever, so the only thing that can hold it in tension is a pressure difference, and the pressure has to exceed the load per unit plan area and nothing else: 0.25 kN/m² of fabric plus 0.6 of snow is 0.85 kN/m², so 1.19 kN/m² does it — 1190 pascals, which is 1.17 per cent of an atmosphere and 121 millimetres of water. Ears do not notice it. A door does: at 2.1 kN on an ordinary leaf, the building needs an airlock rather than a handle. And the whole of it arrives at the foundation as 3365 kN of uplift — 17.9 kN on every metre of perimeter — which is the bill the pressure's smallness conceals. Structural form

Held up by the air inside

A membrane has no bending stiffness at all, so the only thing that can hold it in tension is a pressure difference. The pressure needed to hold up a roof is smaller than the pressure a closed door makes — and the same pressure arrives at the foundation as hundreds of tonnes of uplift.

 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.

 The cheapest way out of being round. A ring under uniform external pressure, drawn in its first four buckling modes with the pressure each one needs underneath it, in N/mm². The pressure has no direction: it stays normal to the wall wherever the wall goes, so it does work on any change of shape that reduces the enclosed area, and the ring buckles into whichever shape is cheapest. Bare, that is the oval — n = 2 at 3EI/R³ — and the modes rise as n² − 1, so three lobes cost 2.67 times as much. Nothing in the drawing prefers any orientation, which is the point — a column has an axis to buckle about and a ring has none. Stability

The pressure that needs no direction

Every buckling problem in this collection has had a load with a direction — a column pushed along its axis, a plate along its edge, an arch by what is on it. A buried pipe has none. The pressure is the same everywhere, it stays normal to the wall as the wall moves, and it does work on any change of shape that reduces the area inside.

 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.

 The free body that makes a hoop force a pressure times a radius. Half a ring cut along a diameter, with the pressure drawn normal to the wall wherever the wall is. Vertical equilibrium of the half ring is the whole derivation: the pressure acts over the projected width 2R whatever the shape of the arc, the two cut faces carry N each, so N = pR — 300 kN per metre here at 1 MPa on a 0.3 m radius. The result contains no wall thickness, no second moment, and no length along the pipe, which is why a hoop force is the one internal force in this collection that arrives with no lever arm attached to it. The stress does contain the thickness — 25 MPa at 12 mm — but the force does not, and a thicker wall carries exactly the same force at a lower stress. Internal forces

The force that is only a radius

Every internal force in this collection arrives with a lever arm attached. A hoop force does not. Cut a cylinder along a diameter and the free body settles it in one line — pressure times radius, with no thickness, no second moment and no length in it — which is why a tank wall is thin and why its worst hoop force is not at the bottom.

 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.

 Wrong in shape, right in two integrals. The compression zone of a C30 section with its neutral axis 150 mm down, drawn twice. The curved outline is the real parabolic-rectangular stress distribution — the material's own law read off the linear strain profile plane sections supplies. The rectangle over it is what every design office uses instead: intensity η f_cd = 16.5 MPa over a depth λx = 125 mm. The two shapes are visibly different and give the same answer, because a bending calculation asks a stress distribution only two questions — how much compression there is, and where its resultant acts. Both are 619 kN at 62.4 mm from the face. The factors are α = 0.8095 and β = 0.4160, and λ = 2β follows from wanting the same centroid. A triangle and a full rectangle match neither integral and are nowhere near. Sections and stress

Deliberately the wrong shape

Concrete in compression follows a curve, and no design office has ever integrated it. Every code in the world replaces it with a rectangle of reduced depth and reduced intensity, and the answer is right to a fraction of a per cent — not because the shapes are similar, which they visibly are not, but because a bending calculation only ever asks a stress distribution two questions.

 The line, and the stone it has to stay inside. A masonry pier 9 m high, 1.6 m thick at the top and battered 12% on its outer face, taking a thrust of 40 kN per metre of run at 25° to the horizontal. The line drawn through it is the locus of the resultant on each horizontal cut: everything above the cut is the free body, and the resultant's position is the moment divided by the vertical force. The dashed pair is the middle third, inside which no tension is implied anywhere on the joint. The line stays inside the stone throughout and reaches the base at 0.503 m from the centre, against a half-width of 1.34 m — but outside the middle third, so part of the base joint is open and the toe is carrying a triangle. Nothing about the strength of the masonry appears anywhere in this figure, and that is the point. Structural form

The weight that makes it safer

Every load in this collection makes a structure worse. A pinnacle does not. A masonry pier fails when the line of compression leaves the stonework, and adding weight at the top rotates that line back towards the vertical without adding anything the pier cannot carry — so the stone is not being strengthened, it is being aimed.

 Four ways to make a cell resist being racked, and one that is not one. One cell of a grid shell under the membrane shear it has to carry, by the four mechanisms available for carrying it, with the racking each produces over a 30 m span under 1.2 kN/m² of asymmetric load. A serviceability limit of span/250 is 120 mm. Four pin-jointed bars in a quadrilateral have no in-plane shear stiffness whatever — the cell folds, and the answer is not a large deflection but a mechanism. Rigid nodes carry the shear by bending the members over a cell, which smears to 12EI/s³ and comes to 0.35% of what a continuous sheet of the same stretching stiffness gives: 1205 mm, ten times the limit. One diagonal per cell, or a third member direction, carries it axially instead and lands within a factor of two of the sheet. That is the whole difference between a grid shell and a row of arches. Structural form

A shell only if the grid takes shear

A curved surface carries load in its own plane at a fraction of the material a flat one needs, and every gridshell ever built is an attempt to buy that with members instead of with a surface. The attempt succeeds or fails on one property nobody draws — whether four bars meeting at a corner can resist being racked — and a pinned quadrilateral grid cannot resist it at all.

 A straight line, and the comfortable case is already two thirds down it. The capacity of a 215 mm masonry wall as a fraction of its squash load, against the eccentricity of the resultant. Nothing in this figure is a buckling calculation. A material that cannot be pulled bears on a strip of width 3(t/2 − e) under a triangular stress block, so the capacity is exactly 1.5f(t − 2e) — a straight line, zero when the resultant reaches the face, and already at 67% at the edge of the kern. The middle third is treated everywhere as the comfortable case; a wall loaded there has given away a third of its capacity before slenderness has been mentioned. The lower line is the same wall with slenderness in it, which enters as an ADDITIONAL eccentricity of 17.4 mm rather than as a reduced stress — h_ef²/2400t, for h_ef = 3000 mm. Euler's load for this wall is 9.6 times what the eccentricity rule allows, which is why no masonry calculation contains it. Stability

It does not buckle, it runs out of width

Every stability failure in this collection is a member that could have carried tension deciding to go sideways instead. Masonry cannot carry tension, and its failure under an eccentric load is not a bifurcation at all — the bearing area simply shrinks until it runs out. The capacity is exactly linear in the eccentricity, Euler's load is ten times anything allowed, and no material property appears until the very end.

 The corner is where the plate twists, and it has to be held down. The twisting moment M_xy over a 6 × 6 m simply-supported panel under 10 kN/m², from Navier's double series. It is zero along both centrelines and largest at the corners, which is the opposite of the bending moments and is why no strip reading contains it: 31% of the load crosses this panel in twist, and a strip can only bend. At a free corner the twisting moment is statically equivalent to a downward point force of 2M_xy — 26.7 kN here, 7.4% of the whole load on the panel, applied at a point — so the corner has to be held down. A panel whose corners are free lifts there, deflects more, and cracks diagonally across them. The deflection at the centre is 2.53 mm, against 4.05 mm for the strip that ignores all this — 60% more, which is the size of what the twist is carrying. Deflection

A third of the load crosses sideways

A slab spanning both ways is usually explained as two beams sharing a load by a fourth power, and the explanation is not merely approximate — it is missing a mechanism. A real plate carries load three ways, and the third one has no beam strip in it: it is twisting, it accounts for a third of the load on a square panel, and it is why the corners lift.

 Three lines through one point, and three different winners. Modulus against density on logarithmic axes, with a guide line for each of three indices drawn through mild steel. A performance index E^(1/n)/ρ is a straight line of slope n on these axes, so ranking materials by it means sliding the line up and to the left and seeing what it leaves behind. The three lines have three different orders, which is why a table of properties cannot answer the question on its own: for a tie the answer is carbon fibre, for a beam it is timber at 4.28 times steel, and for a plate timber wins by more still. The construction is Ashby's; the arithmetic on it is this site's. Materials

The ranking belongs to the load case

Every table of material properties ever printed ranks by strength, and every one of them answers a question nobody asked. What a structure wants is the least mass for a stated performance, and the combination of properties that gives it changes with the shape of the member — so timber beats steel four to one as a beam and loses to it as a tie, without either material changing.

 Deflection goes as the fourth power of the span. Deflection against span for a constant load intensity and section, with two slower relationships drawn faintly behind it for comparison: the load itself, which grows in proportion to the span, and the bending moment, which grows as its square. Doubling the span multiplies the deflection by sixteen, while the moment only quadruples. Equilibrium

The weight that has to be known before it can be found

Every other load arrives from outside and can be looked up. A structure's own weight depends on how big it is, and how big it is depends on the load — so the first calculation on any project is a fixed point, and the fraction of a member spent carrying itself turns out to be the square of its span as a fraction of a span it can never reach.

 The length at which a beam stops being a beam. Elastic critical moment against the distance between lateral restraints, with the section's plastic capacity drawn across it. The two cross at 4086 — beyond that length the beam buckles sideways before it reaches the strength its cross-section has, and the capacity is set by the restraints rather than by the steel. Stability

The load that moves with the twist

A beam about to buckle sideways is beginning to rotate, and everything attached to it rotates with it. A load hung from the top flange swings out over the side and drives the rotation on; the same load hung underneath swings back and stops it. Two identical beams, two different capacities, and the only difference is a height.

 A Pratt truss of 8 panels. A Pratt truss under equal panel-point loads. The joint equilibrium equations were assembled and solved; 14 members came out in tension, 13 in compression and 2 carrying nothing. Stability

The tie that spends an afternoon as a strut

A tension member is chosen by its area and nothing else. A compression member is chosen by how that area is arranged. So a member whose force reverses under some load case is not merely being asked for the same number with the other sign — it is being designed against a different variable, and the same steel can carry seventy times more or less depending on a shape nobody chose for that purpose.

 The neutral axis is wherever the first moment vanishes. A 300 by 600 section with 1800 mm² of steel at a depth of 540, carrying 250 kNm after the tension side has cracked. The neutral axis is no longer at mid-depth: it has risen to 234.5 mm from the top, which is where the first moment of the compression zone plus the transformed steel vanishes. The compression is 15.4 N/mm² at the top fibre and the steel carries 301 N/mm²; the resulting couple is 541 kN on a lever arm of 462 mm, which multiplies back to the 250 kNm applied. The uncracked section would have had 6673×10⁶ mm⁴ against the cracked 3809×10⁶ — a loss of 43% of the stiffness. Sections and stress

Where the steel is, not how much of it

A section in bending resists a moment with a couple, and a couple is a force times a distance. The force is bought — it is an area of steel at a stress. The distance is free, decided by where the bars were put, and it is the variable almost nobody optimises because it does not appear on an order.

 Three ways to move the same column, and they are not close. The same 2000 kN moved 3 m across 14 m, built three ways and drawn to one scale. The deep beam is 1.14 m of concrete, 24.1 tonnes, and settles 60.6 mm in the long term. The storey-deep truss takes the same moment as a couple at 3.6 m centres, so its chords carry M/h and it weighs 2.6 tonnes — a fifth of the beam — while settling 15.8 mm, and it does not creep. The wall is 72.8 tonnes and hardly moves at all, 1.71 mm, of which 36% is shear rather than bending — which is what a member as deep as it is long always does, and is why beam theory does not describe one. A wall as a deep beam is the stiffest of the three by a factor of 35.4. Structural form

The same span, four ways

A beam, a truss, an arch and a cable can all cross the same gap under the same load, and the choice between them is usually described as a matter of judgement or of taste. It is neither. Each carries the load by a different mechanism, each mechanism has a different exponent, and an exponent decides the ordering at every span rather than at some spans.

 The corner columns take what the middle ones did not. Axial stress in the columns across one flange face of a 36 by 36 m framed tube, at the base. Plane sections says the flat line: every column on the face at the same distance from the neutral axis, therefore at the same stress. The solved distribution is the curve — 78.5 N/mm² at the corner against 13.4 in the middle, a ratio of 5.88. The middle columns lag because the only route the axial force has into them is the in-plane shear of the spandrel frame, bay by bay from the corner. The face is carrying its resultant on an effective width of 45 per cent, and the tube deflects as though its second moment were 64 per cent of the gross. Structural form

The columns that lean

A framed tube carries its wind load by bending the spandrel beams between its columns, and it does it badly — the corner columns take nearly six times what the middle ones do. Tilt the columns instead, so the perimeter is triangulated, and the same shear is carried axially. The concentration falls to 1.21 and the tube recovers most of the stiffness the plan said it had.

 An enhanced strength that is the strength of a tie. Bearing strength as a multiple of the design cylinder strength, against how far the load is allowed to spread, with the bursting tension the spread creates on the same axis. The enhancement is √(A₂/A₁) and it reaches 2.80 for the 250 mm pad on a 700 mm block drawn — 47.6 N/mm² against a design strength of 17.0. There is no material property in that statement beyond the one being enhanced, and the reason is on the second curve: a load that spreads does so along inclined struts, a pair of inclined struts has a horizontal component, and that component is 16.1% of the load. It has to be tied. 1099 mm² of steel is what the enhancement actually is, and the cap of three is not a property of concrete — it is the angle past which nobody believes the strut. Internal forces

Three times as strong under a smaller pad

Press a small plate onto a large block of concrete and it will carry three times the stress a cylinder of the same concrete fails at. The enhancement is a ratio of areas with no material property in it, which should be a warning: what has actually been measured is not the concrete's strength but the strength of a tie holding it together.

 The tendon is a load, pointing the other way. A 14 m beam with a parabolic tendon dropping 260 mm to midspan, stressed to 1440 kN after losses. Its curvature pushes the beam up along its whole length with an intensity of 8Pe/L² = 15.28 kN/m, against an applied 17.63 kN/m — so 2.34 kN/m is left to bend anything, and the beam carries 57.4 kNm where an unstressed one carries 432 kNm. What the section then feels is 6.40 MPa of uniform compression and very little else. Internal forces

The load that comes from changing direction

A force that travels in a straight line asks nothing of anything. Bend its path and it asks for a transverse load of F over R along every millimetre of the curve, and that load is real, is nowhere on the load schedule, and is the same statement behind a prestressing tendon, a hoop force, an arch thrust and a web that buckles with nothing applied to it.

 The dimension the capacity rides on is not a drawn dimension. Moment capacity of a 225 mm slab against the cover to the reinforcement. The line is very nearly straight, because capacity is A_s·f_yd·z and z is about 0.9d — so the capacity is proportional to a dimension that is not on the drawing. What is on the drawing is the overall depth, and the effective depth is what the cover, the link and half a bar diameter leave of it: 225 − 30 − 0 − 8 = 187 mm here. Every one of those three is a site tolerance rather than a design decision. Ten millimetres of bar position is 5.7% of this slab's capacity and 1.8% of a 600 mm beam's — the same workmanship costs 3.0 times as much in the shallow member, and the shallow member is the one whose steel is walked on before the pour. Sections and stress

The dimension nobody can measure

Every flexural capacity in reinforced concrete is proportional to the effective depth, and the effective depth is not on the drawing. It is what is left of the thickness after a cover, a link and half a bar diameter have been taken off it — and each of those is a site tolerance. In a slab, ten millimetres of workmanship is six per cent of the strength.

 The answer is continuous and the catalogue is not. Capacity bought against capacity required, over a real rolled series. The straight line is what a continuous section would give — exactly the moment asked for, and nothing can be bought on it. The staircase is what a catalogue gives: each tread is one section, each riser is the step to the next, and the vertical gap between the two is steel that is paid for and does nothing. The steps in this series run from 23% to 59% in plastic modulus, so the average waste is 15.0% and the worst is 46% — just above a riser, where the section below has been missed by a kilonewton-metre. The 1200 kNm marked buys a 686×254×125 at 1418 kNm, which is 85% utilised. Two things follow that a continuous treatment cannot see: the sensitivity of a design to an assumption is zero over most of a tread and enormous at a riser, and an optimisation that returns three significant figures is answering a question with twelve answers in it. Sections and stress

The answer is continuous and the catalogue is not

Every optimisation in this subject returns a number with three significant figures in it, and nothing with three significant figures can be bought. What can be bought is a rolled series whose steps are a quarter to a half apart, so the member that goes on the drawing is on average a tenth stronger than the one that was calculated and can be a third stronger for no reason at all.

 A section has two areas and the tables give one of them. Peak shear stress divided by the mean, for four sections of exactly the same gross area and depth. The mean is V/A and is the number a first calculation uses; the peak is what the material actually sees, and the ratio between them is a property of shape alone. A rectangle's is 1.5 — the parabola's peak over its average — and it is one of the few numbers in this subject that is exactly derivable and universally ignored. An I-section's is near 1.98, and the reason is on the second bar: 97% of the shear is inside a web that is 56% of the area. So the flanges carry the moment and almost none of the shear, and the web carries the shear and almost none of the moment — which is why a shear check on an I-section uses the web area and a moment check uses the whole section, and why the two checks are about two different pieces of steel. Sections and stress

The section has two areas

A shear force divided by the area of the section is not the shear stress anywhere in it. A rectangle's peak is exactly one and a half times that number and an I-section's web carries nearly all of the shear over a fifth of the area, which is why a moment check and a shear check on the same member are checks on two different pieces of steel.

 Two curvatures of opposite sign, which is what makes it a structure. A cable net over a 36 m square, drawn as the two families of cables that are also the two rulings of the surface. One family sags and carries downward load by hanging; the other rises and carries upward load — wind uplift, and a load reversal anywhere — by the same mechanism upside down. Neither can do anything alone. A single family of cables is a mechanism: it changes shape freely under any load pattern it was not tensioned for, and the shape it moves to is decided by the load rather than by the designer. Put the two together and each is the other's restraint, but only if they are pulled against one another first — the pretension of 520 kN in the sagging family and 715 in the hogging one is a self-equilibrating state that exists with no load on the roof at all, and it is what turns two mechanisms into one structure. The curvatures are drawn four times their true value: a real net of this span sags 2.2 m over 36, which is flatter than it looks anywhere. Structural form

Two curvatures of opposite sign

A single family of cables is not a structure. It is a mechanism that takes whatever shape the load asks for, and it will do that under any load pattern it was not tensioned for. Cross it with a second family curved the other way, pull the two against each other, and the pair becomes stiff — with no bending anywhere and no material property involved in the stiffness at all.

All themes