Professional Documents
Culture Documents
BY:
W.P.R Indrajith (168913V)
Introduction............................................................................................................. 1
Example 1................................................................................................................ 3
Example 2................................................................................................................ 5
Example 3................................................................................................................ 6
Example 4................................................................................................................. 8
Example 5................................................................................................................ 9
Example 6................................................................................................................ 11
Example 7................................................................................................................ 14
Example 8................................................................................................................ 17
Conclusion ............................................................................................................. 19
Introduction
We were taught to calculate reactions in statically indeterminate structures using "Force method of
analysis" and "Displacement method of analysis" during the classes. The examples which we worked
out during the course have been solved using SAP2000 software package and compared with the
results which we obtained with our manual calculations.
This short report presents the compression of results between manual calculation and SAP2000
output. Most of the examples, solved manually, contain variables with symbols rather than numerical
values. But, during the pre-processing stage with software, we have to define material and section
properties with numerical values. In order to compare the results, rounded up values were used
during the property definition stage with the software. Yet, there are some examples which those
parameters were given in the example itself. Those were used exactly the same during definitions in
the software.
For the general case, the material and section definition was done with the values given below.
= 1x 10-5 m4
Page 1
Material and section definition for the typical frame section with SAP2000
Page 2
Example 1: A B C
L L
Arrangement in SAP2000
Page 3
Bending moment diagram- SAP2000 Results - Load case 1 : Settlement at A
(Bending moments in KNm)
Bending moment diagram- SAP2000 Results - Load case 2 : Settlement at B and Rotation at C
(Bending moments in KNm)
Results Comparison
Manual Analysis
SAP2000 Analysis
With notation With values
L.C 1 L.C 2 L.C 1 L.C 2 L.C 1 L.C 2
2 2
Reaction at A (kN) (-0.017EI/L ) 0.046EI/L -L/500 (- 68 ) 183.99 ( - 68.53) 185
Reaction at B (kN) 0.0429EI/L2 (-0.1577EI/L2) 171.6 (- 630.8 ) 171.31 ( - 630.38)
B.M at C (kNm) (-0.00857EI/L) 0.0651EI/L (- 171.4) 1302 (- 171.19) 1301.86
Above table shows the reaction summary where SAP2000 sign convension
converted as per manual analysis
Page 4
Example 2: udl - W kN/m
A D
L B L C L
Arrangement in SAP2000
Results Comparison
Manual Analysis
SAP2000 Analysis
With notation With values
2
Bending moment at B (kNm) 0.0377 wL 9.425 9.43
Page 5
Example 3:
Cable C2 3m
Cable C1 1.5 m
A B
3m C 3m D 6m
25 kN
Data
Beam I = 16 x 106 mm4
E = 200 GN/m2
Cable a = 100 mm2
= 1 x 10-5 per oC Find forces in cables and bending moment at D due to 25kN at
D and drop of temperature of 200C.
Analysis with sap
Data:
Define member section: width (b) = 192mm, height (h) = 100mm (I = 16 x 106 mm4 )
Arrangement in SAP2000
Page 6
Assignment of temperature drop in SAP2000
Cable forces
Results Comparison
Page 7
Example 4: 4P
B C
L
udl - P/L
0.8 L
P
A D
0.6 L
Arrangement in SAP2000
Page 8
Example 5: PL P
B C
L
0.5 L
L P D
Page 9
Bending moment diagram from SAP2000
Results Comparison
Manual Analysis
SAP2000 Analysis
With notation With values
Bending moment at A (kNm) 0.09 PL 9 9.36
Bending moment at D (kNm) 0.27 PL 27 27.08
B.Moment at end BA (kNm) 0.61 PL 61 61.45
B.Moment at end CD (kNm) 0.33 PL 33 33.33
Signs have been omitted and only the magnitudes are presented.
Page 10
Example 6: B Plan view of a grid is shown
udl - q kN/m L/3
A 2L/3 L/3 C
2L/3
It is given that, GJ = 0.5 EI. But based on the defined material properties and member dimensions,
that condition does not come automatically. Hence Torsional constant need to be modified as
follows.
Page 11
Material data definition in SAP2000
E = 1 x 1010 kN/m2
G = 4.167 x 109 kN/m2
I = 1 x 10-5 m4
Section definition in SAP2000 J = 1.984 x 10-5 m4
Page 12
Modification factor for Torsional constant in SAP2000
Results Comparison
Manual Analysis
SAP2000 Analysis
With notation With values
Vertical reaction at A (kN) 0.4197 qL 25.182 25.08
2
Bending moment at A (kNm) 0.0611 qL 21.996 21.69
Page 13
Example 7: Plan view of a grid is shown
udl - q kN/m
B
L
A
udl - q kN/m
L
Flexural rigidity EI. Take GJ = 0.5 EI Find end moments at A & deformations at B.
It is given that, GJ = 0.5 EI. But based on the defined material properties and member dimensions,
that condition does not come automatically. Hence Torsional constant need to be modified exactly
the same way as did in example 6.
Page 14
With the specified material and section,
Page 15
Bending moment diagram with SAP2000
Results Comparison
Manual Analysis
SAP2000 Analysis
With notation With values
Bending moment at A (kNm) 0.443qL2 70.88 71.11
4
Vrtical deflection at B (m) 0.097qL /EI 0.00248 0.00249
3
Rotation at B 0.111qL /EI 0.00071 0.00071
Signs have been omitted and only the magnitudes are presented.
Page 16
Example 8: A B C D
3m 4m 3m
Arrangement in SAP2000
Application of settlement at C
Application of settlement at C
Page 17
Bending moment diagram
(Bending moments in KNm)
Results Comparison
Manual Analysis
SAP2000 Analysis
With notation With values
B.M at A (kNm) 5.503 x 10-3 EI 550.3 547.84
-2
B.M at B (kNm) 1.10 x 10 EI 1100 1098.31
B.M at C (kNm) 1.565 x 10-2 EI 1565 1562.58
Signs have been omitted and only the magnitudes are presented.
Page 18
Conclusion
- The results are not exactly the same and the difference is almost in the decimal places and
negligible.
- This exercise helped to improve the confidence of both manual analysis and software based
analysis with SAP2000.
Page 19