Structural Engineering & Statics
where the load goes
Theme

Which failure arrives first — page 8

Essays 169 to 177 of 177 on this thread, in the same order.
The tube flattens because of the bending, and then cannot carry it. Moment against curvature for a long tube of radius 300 mm and wall 4 mm. Compression on one face and tension on the other are both directed along a curved line, so each produces an inward transverse pressure and the circle is squashed into an oval by the bending it is carrying. That reduces the second moment, so the curve bends over and reaches a limit point — no bifurcation, no imperfection, nothing to be sensitive to. It arrives at an ovalisation of exactly 2/9 for every tube of every size in every material, at 1018 kNm, where the secant stiffness has fallen to 67 per cent of the undeformed value and the tangent stiffness is zero. The relaxed path reproduces the closed form to 0.004 per cent. Stability

The tube that flattens itself

Bend a tube and the compression on one face and the tension on the other are both running along a curve, so both push inward. The circle becomes an oval, the second moment falls, and the moment–curvature curve turns over at a limit point that needs no imperfection, no bifurcation and nothing to be sensitive to.

 The circle is searched for, and the first guess is 39 per cent optimistic. The same slope with 81 trial circles evaluated, each one through the toe and each one giving its own factor of safety. There is no equation whose solution is the answer: the slip surface is a shape the ground chooses, so the calculation is a search over shapes and the answer is the smallest number found — 1.191 against 1.650 for the circle a first guess puts through the toe from above the middle of the slope, which is 39 per cent optimistic. A slope analysis that reports one circle has reported nothing. Equilibrium

The surface that has to be searched for

Every other check in this collection is made at a section somebody drew. A slope has no section — the failure surface is a shape the ground chooses, so the calculation is a search over shapes, and the answer is the smallest number found rather than the solution of anything.

 Two answers added, and the answer to the two together, drawn on top of each other. A 8 m beam under a 60 kN point load at mid-span (152.38 mm), under 12 kN/m of uniform load (152.38 mm), and under both at once (304.76 mm). The sum of the first two is 304.76 mm, and the residual between it and the third is zero — not small, zero, to the last bit of the arithmetic. That exactness is not a numerical accident: the governing equation is linear in the load, so the response is a linear operator applied to it, and a linear operator distributes over addition by definition. Everything on this site that adds is standing on that one line. Deflection

The addition everything else rests on

Influence lines add, the unit-load method adds, moment distribution adds, load combinations add, and a stiffness matrix is linear by construction. All of it stands on one sentence with three hypotheses in it — and when they fail, two of the failures point in opposite directions.

 The deformation with no limit against it. A 8 m open section carrying 12 kN/m at an eccentricity of 75 mm from its shear centre. The torque is small — 900 Nmm per mm — and the twist is not: 3.40° at mid-span with the ends restrained against warping, against 9.09° if they are not, a factor of 2.67. What that angle does is move the flange tip sideways by 11.9 mm — 82 per cent of the member's own vertical deflection, and 37 per cent of the span/250 that vertical deflection is checked against. The same load on a closed section of the same depth moves it 0.15 mm, 80 times less. No code gives a limit for this quantity, so it is the one movement in the collection that is computed only after somebody has complained about it. Deflection

The movement with no limit against it

Every code in the world gives a deflection limit. None gives a twist limit — and a beam loaded off its shear centre twists. On an open section a modest eccentricity moves the flange tip further sideways than four fifths of the sag that does get checked, and nothing anywhere says whether that is acceptable.

 Steel and concrete happen to match, and nothing else on the list does. The mismatch strain a 40 degree change produces in seven pairs of materials that engineering bonds together, which is the difference of their coefficients of expansion times the temperature. Steel against concrete is 80 microstrain — 17 per cent of the larger coefficient, and by far the smallest on the list. It puts 0.223 N/mm² of tension into the concrete, 7.7 per cent of its tensile strength and 1.9 per cent of the 12 N/mm² a fully restrained member would have carried. Reinforced concrete works because of a coincidence in the third significant figure of two numbers nobody chose, and the same bar in aluminium would put in two and a third times as much. Materials

The coincidence reinforced concrete stands on

Steel expands at twelve microstrain per degree and concrete at ten. Nobody chose either number, they are not equal, and the seventeen per cent between them is the smallest mismatch of any pair of materials engineering bonds together — which is the reason the most-used structural material on earth does not tear itself apart every summer.

 The ductility number depends on the ruler. Elongation after fracture against the gauge length it was measured over, in units of √S₀. A tensile specimen extends uniformly until the ultimate load and then localises into a neck, so the total is a strain (16 per cent here) plus a length (7.2 mm), and dividing a length by the gauge length is what makes the curve fall. At the two standard gauges the same steel reports 27.5 per cent over 5.65√S₀ and 21.8 over 11.3√S₀ — a ratio of 1.264, and 42 per cent of the first number is a property of the specimen rather than of the material. Materials

The ductility that depends on the ruler

Percentage elongation after fracture is the most quoted ductility measure in the subject and one of the least well defined. A specimen stretches uniformly until the ultimate load and then localises, so the number is a strain plus a length — and dividing a length by the gauge length makes the answer a property of the specimen.

 The load path has a kink in it, and the kink is a plate thick. Two 10 mm plates lapped over 60 mm and pulled with 60 kN. The two load paths are offset by the thickness of a plate, so the joint carries a moment nobody applied: P × 10.0 mm / 2. Taken at face value that gives a peak stress 4.00 times the mean. The joint rotates under load and the moment falls to 86 per cent of it, leaving 3.57 times — a saving of 11 per cent and not, on a plate this thick, a rescue. The bolt is bent as well as sheared: 382 N/mm² of bending against 191 of shear. Connections

The joint that is crooked by construction

Lap two plates and fasten them and the two load paths are offset by the thickness of a plate. The joint carries a moment nobody applied, the peak stress is four times the mean, and the rotation that is supposed to straighten it out saves eleven per cent — because the rescue works for thin sheet with a long lap and a bolted structural joint is neither.

 The section that is checked is not the section that was chosen. A 457 mm beam coped 50 mm deep over 120 mm to frame into a girder. What is left is a tee with a section modulus of 3.836e+5 mm³ against the whole section's 1.438e+6 — 27 per cent. The moment at the end of the cope is the reaction on a lever arm of 130 mm: 23.4 kNm, giving 61 N/mm² and a flexural utilisation of 0.17. The web now has a free edge along the cope, so its buckling coefficient collapses from 4 to 0.425 — a factor of 9.4 — and the re-entrant corner has a stress concentration of 5.5 on a 10 mm radius. Connections

The section that is checked is not the one chosen

A beam framing into a girder has its top flange cut away so the two can sit at the same level. What is left is a tee with a quarter of the section modulus, a web with a free edge, and a re-entrant corner — and the beam was selected on a table entry that describes none of it.

 Buildings that sway alike need almost no gap between them. The separation two adjacent buildings need, against the ratio of their periods. The obvious answer is the sum of what each can do — 340 mm — and it is wrong, because the two peaks do not occur at the same instant. The right combination is the one modal responses use, √(u₁² + u₂² − 2ρu₁u₂), with ρ the cross-correlation coefficient of the two responses. ρ depends on the period ratio and behaves the opposite way to intuition: at a ratio of one the two buildings sway together, ρ = 1, and the gap collapses to the difference of the two, 100 mm. At the 0.57 drawn ρ is 0.029 and the gap is 248 mm — 27 per cent less than the sum, and 99 per cent of the square root of the sum of squares. Dynamics

The gap between two buildings

Two towers side by side in an earthquake need a gap. The obvious answer is the sum of what each can move, and it is wrong — because the two peaks do not happen at the same instant. What decides the answer is the ratio of the two periods, and buildings that sway alike need almost no gap at all.

All themes