You are on page 1of 8

International Journal of Soft Computing and Engineering (IJSCE)

ISSN: 2231-2307, Volume-2, Issue-3, July 2012

Effect of Shear on Stress Distribution in


Redundant Frames
Chidolue C.A., Aginam C.H.

Abstract - In this paper, shear-modified expressions for After integrating the fourth order differential equations
fixed end moments and reactions were obtained for various obtained, they used initial value approach to express the four
beam loading conditions using the shear modified stiffness unknown constants of integration in terms of initial values of
coefficients of elastic beams derived by the authors. By taking deflection, slope, bending moment and shear. Thus the results
the effect of shear on the behavior of beam elements into
obtained took into consideration the simultaneous action of
consideration, a set of modified homogeneous solution of the
beam elastic curve equation was obtained and used to derive bending and shear in beams.
expressions for fixed end moments and shears for beams with In this work, shear-modified expressions for fixed end
various end conditions and loading. The shear-modified fixed moments and reactions were derived for various beam loading
end moment expressions were used to analyze redundant conditions using the shear modified stiffness coefficients of
frames. The results of the analysis were then compared with elastic beams derived by the authors[5]. The expressions
those obtained using the traditional expressions for fixed end obtained were used to analyze redundant frames. The results of
moments and shears. the analysis were then compared with those obtained using the
Keywords: Elastic curve, shear- modified stiffness traditional expressions for fixed end moments and reactions.
coefficients, fixed end moments, redundant frames, stress
Three portal frames of different beam-column assemblages
distribution.
and loading conditions were analyzed using (a) expressions for
fixed end moments obtained in books [6], [7], and (b) shear-
I. INTRODUCTION
modified expressions derived in this work.
Beam stiffness coefficients which make up the
elements of the stiffness matrix of elastic beams were II. THE SHEAR MODIFIED STIFFNESS
derived on the assumption that the beam element is COEFFICIENTS
subjected to pure bending. Even in the absence of A set of initial value homogeneous solution of the elastic
externally applied load every structural beam possesses curve equation is given as follows [2]:
some self weight which gives rise to distributed load on
M 2 Q 3
the structural member. It is well known that once there is y ( x) y0 0 x 0 x 0 x (a)
distributed load on a beam element, shear inevitably 2 EI 6 EI
accompanies the induced bending moment. Thus, in real
M0 Q0 2
life, the condition of pure bending is hardly attained but ( x) 0 x x (b) (1)
can only be a sub-state in the analysis of elastic beams if EI 2 EI
superposition principle is in use. M ( x) M 0 Q0 x (c)
Early work by Karamanski et al, [1], included the effect
of shear in deriving stiffness coefficients of elastic beams Q( x) Q0 (d)
by considering a beam element as member in pure
bending, i.e., shear was initially ignored and there after its where, y0 , 0 , M 0 and Q0 are the initial values of
contribution on deflection of elastic curve was added as a deflection, slope, bending moment and shear force, respectively
secondary effect. on the elastic beam. x = distance along the beam measured
Other studies which included shear effects on response from a known co-ordinate.
of structural beams are those of Osadebe and Mama, [2], By taking into consideration, the effect of shear on the
Chugh, [3], Brush and Mitchel, [4]. behavior of beam elements the authors obtained the following
Osadebe and Chidolue [5], derived a shear- modified homogeneous solution of the elastic curve equation:
modified differential equation of the elastic curve of a 2

uniform beam element by considering simultaneous action M0x Q 3 2
y ( x ) y0 0 x 0 x 3 x (a)
of bending and shear. 2 EI 6 EI


M x Q 2 2
( x) 0 0 0 x (b)
EI 2 EI
M ( x) M 0 Q0 x (c)
Manuscript received on July, 2012
Chidolue C.A Department of Civil Engineering, Nnamdi Azikiwe
University, Awka, Anambra State, Nigeria
Q( x) Q0 (d) (2)
C.H. Aginam Department of Civil Engineering, Nnamdi Azikiwe where, is a parameter governing shear modification factor
University, Awka, Anambra State, Nigeria.
and is given by,

199
Effect of Shear on Stress Distribution in Redundant Frames

2r K 1

(3) M 2 Q 3 2
y ( x) y0 0 ( x) 0 x 0 x 3 x +
2 EI 6 EI
r = radius of gyration = I / A
P
x a 3 x a
I = Moment of inertia, 3 2
+ (a)
A = Cross sectional area, 6 EI
K = Shape factor

M x Q P
= Poisson ratio x a
2 2 2 2
( x) 0 0 0 x
E = Elastic modulus EI 2 EI 2 EI
(b)
Equations (2a) to (2d) constitute a set of shear modified M ( x) M 0 Q0 x P x a (c)
homogeneous solution of the elastic curve equation which
can be used to derive the expressions for fixed end Q( x) Q0 P (d) (5)
moments and reactions of beam-column assemblages. In order to obtain fixed end moments and shears under the
action of the point load P, we note that the displacement and
III. DETERMINATION OF SHEAR-MODIFIED FIXED slope at both ends of the beam are zero, i.e., y(0) = 0, (0) = 0,
y(L)= 0, ( L) 0 .
END MOMENTS AND REACTIONS

A: Fixed- ended beam with point load Applying these conditions to (5a) and (5b) we obtain that ,

a P b
2

3 2
3
3M 0 L Q0 L 3L P b 3b 0
2

and

Q0 QL
2 2

2 M 0 L Q0 L P b 0
2 2

x Solving and simplifying gives:
Pb 3L 1 2b 1 3
l L 2
Q0
Fig.l1 3 (a)
L 1 3
Pb L1 b2
2
A uniform beam of length L, subjected to a lateral
M0
2 (b)
L 1 3
point load P as shown in Fig. 1 was considered. Equations
(2a) to (2d) constitute the set of homogeneous solution of
Pb 3L 1 2b 1 3 L
the elastic beam curve, i.e., when the imposed lateral load 2 3
QL
3 2
(c)
1 3
is absent. In order to obtain a general solution we consider
the additional effect of the imposed load on the beam. L b
Noting that the imposed load P has the similitude of
Pb a 1 2
2 2
shear, the particular integral for displacement y(x), slope
2
ML (d) (6)
(x), moment M(x), and shear Q(x), can be obtained by L b 1 3
considering the imposed load P as the parameter Q 0 in Fig.
1. However, the origin is seemingly displaced to the point Where,
of application of load P, so that initial distance which 1 1 3 3
measured x in the homogeneous solution will now measure
(x-a) distance in the particular integral. Also, since the 2 1 3 3
parameter Q0 has opposite direction with P, we introduce
1 2 L 3 b L L ,
P with negative sign and obtain the particular integrals as
follows. 2 b 3 3 3 L2
2 / b2 and / L
2 2
P
x a 3 x a
3 2
yp (a) Equations (6a) to (6d) are the shear modified fixed end
6 EI
moments and reactions for fixed ended beam with point load
P
x a
shown in Fig. 1. The expressions within the square brackets are

2 2
p (b)

2 EI the shear modification factors which tend to unity when shear
effects are neglected.
M p P x a (c)

Qp P (d) (4)
B: Fixed ended beam with moment at arbitrary point
along the beam
Addition of these particular integrals, (4a) to (4d), to
the set of homogeneous solutions, (2a) to (2d), gives a set
of general solution, (5a) to (5d). Thus:

200
International Journal of Soft Computing and Engineering (IJSCE)
ISSN: 2231-2307, Volume-2, Issue-3, July 2012

a b Ma 1
M0 ML L 3b
M 2 (d) (9)
L 1 3
Q0 QL
x
L C: Fixed ended beam with uniformly distributed load
l (u.d.l)
Fig. 2
q
In this case the parameter M has similitude with M0 in
the homogeneous solution and is of the same sign dx QL
Q0
(direction). Therefore by replacing M 0 with M and x
L
changing x to (x-a) in the homogeneous solution (2a) to l
(2d), the particular integrals , (7a) to (7d) are obtained. Fig.l 3

x a
M 2
yp (a) In the case of fixed ended beam with uniformly distributed
2 EI load, Q = qdx and the particular integrals, y p , p , M P , and
p x a
M
(b) Q p are obtained by integrating the appropriate expressions for
EI
Mp M (c) deflection, slope, moment and shear, in (2), containing Q0 , and

Qp 0 (d) (7) replacing Q0 with qdx. Thus:

The general solution is obtained by adding (2) and (7).


dy p
6 EI
qdx
3 2

x 3 x
Thus:
M
y ( x ) y0 0 x 0 x
2 yp
q
6 EI
3 2

x 3 x dx
2 EI (a)
q x 3 x
4 2 2

Q

M
x a
2 3 2
0 x 3 x yp (a)
2 EI 6 EI 6 EI 4 2


M0x 3 2
x a q x
M
( x) 0 p
qdx
2 2
x 3 dx
qx
(b)
EI EI 2 EI 6 EI 2 EI
(b)


Q0 2 2 2
x M p qxdx
qx
(c)
2 EI 2
M ( x) M 0 M Q0 x (c) Q p qdx qx (d) (9)
Q( x) Q0 (d) (8)
Hence, the general solution is obtained by adding (2) and (9).
The deflection and slope at both ends of the beam are Thus:
zero. Thus, y(0) = 0; (0) 0 ; y(L) = 0; ( L) 0 .

M 2 Q 3 2
y ( x) y0 0 ( x) 0 x 0 x 3 x
Applying these conditions to (8a) and (8b) we obtain that: 2 EI 6 EI
2 2 3
3M 0 L 3Mb Q0 L 3L 0
2

qx
4

2 2
q x
(a)


2 2 24 EI 4 EI
2 M 0 L 2 Mb Q0 L 0
6qxEI q2EIx (b
3 2

Solving and simplifying yields, ( x) 0


M0x
EI

Q0
2 EI
x 2

2

6 Mab 1 2
Q0 qx
3 (a)
L 1 3 M ( x ) M 0 Q0 x (c)
2
Mb 1 Q( x) Q0 qx (d) (10)
M0 L
2 1 3
3a (b)
L The displacement and slope at both ends of the beam are
6 Mab 1 zero, i.e, y(0) = 0, (0) 0 , y(L) = 0, ( L) 0
QL
3 (c)
From (10a) and (10b) we obtain that;
L 1 3

201
Effect of Shear on Stress Distribution in Redundant Frames

2 3
2 4
2 2
12 M 0 L 4Q0 L 3 L qL 6q L
Solving and simplifying gives; Q0
3M L b

2 2

L 3 2 2 L2
and 12M 0 L2 6Q0 L L2 2 2qL4 6q 2 L2
Solving and simplifying gives : (a)

Q0
qL 6 1
2 3 1
(a)
3 L2 b 2 3 2 2 L2
M0 M
(b)
qL 1 9 36
2 2

2
3 2 L
2


M0 (b)
3 1
3M L b
12 2 2
QL (c)
qL 1 L 3 2 2 L2
QL
2 3 1
(c)
ML 0 (d) (13)
qL 1 9 36
2 2
ML (d) (11)
12 3 1 F: Propped cantilever with u.d.l.
This case is similar to case C. The general solution is given
D. Propped cantilever with point load by (10a) to (10d). The end conditions are; y(0) = 0, y(L) = 0,
This case is similar to case A except for the boundary (0) 0 , M ( L) 0
conditions: Applying the end conditions to (10a) and (10c) we obtain
y(0) = 0; y(L) = 0 that ;
(0) 0 0 , M ( L) M L 0 12M 0 L2 4Q0 L3 3 2 L qL4 6qL2 2
Applying these to the set of general solutions, eqns (4a) to
(4d) we obtain that: And
3M 0 L Q0 L 3L
2 3 2
P b 3
3b 2
2M 0 2Q0 L qL2
and
Hence,
3M 0 L2 3Q0 L3 3PL2b
which solutions are; qL 5 6
Q0
4 2 3
(a)
Pb b 3 3L
2 2 2
Q0 (a)
3 2 3 2
L qL 1
M0
4 2 3
(b)
Pb b L 3 3 L
2 2 2 2
M0 (b)
2 2 3
L 3qL 1 2
QL
4 2 3
(c)
Pb b 3 3L L
2 2 2 3
QL (c)
3 2 3
L b ML 0 (d) (14)
ML 0 (d) (12) The summary of these shear-modified fixed end moments
and support reactions is on Table 2.
E: Propped cantilever with moment at arbitrary IV. APPLICATION OF SHEAR-MODIFIED FIXED
point along the beam END MOMENTS AND SUPPORT REACTIONS IN
This case is similar to case B except for the boundary
conditions, and has (8a) to (8d ) as general solutions.
THE ANALYSIS OF REDUNDANT FRAMES
Figures 4, 5, and 6 show three redundant portal frames of
Applying the end conditions: y(0) = 0, 0 0 , y(L) = 0, different beam-column assemblages and loading. These portal
M(L) = 0, to eqns (8a) and (8c) we obtain that; frames are analyzed using (a) traditional expressions for fixed
3M 0 L2 Q0 L3 3L 2 3Mb2 end moments and shears, (b) expressions for shear-modified
fixed end moments and support reactions obtained in this work.
and Classical displacement method of analysis was used with
3M 0 L2 3Q0 L3 3ML2 transformed member rigidity.

202
International Journal of Soft Computing and Engineering (IJSCE)
ISSN: 2231-2307, Volume-2, Issue-3, July 2012
30KN/m
C 2EI D

EI EI 21.60
21.60
22.50
30KN/m 3m 22.50
36KN/m 7.02
B C 7.20
2EI
9.6KN/m B E
9.6KN/m 3m
3m 26.72
EI EI EI EI 26.72
7.02
A D A F 7.20

2.5m 3m

Fig. 4: Simple portal Fig. 5: Two storey 7.02


7.20
frame portal frame
Fig. 7a: Fixed end moment Fig. 7b: Fixed end moment
diagram (shear ignored) diagram (shear included)

36KN/m )
Table 1: Values of shear-modification
parameter 2r K 1
C 2EI D 2EI I

EI EI EI
3m Type of Shape of
45KN/m material cross-section
9.6KN/m Rectangular 2.846 r
B 2EI E 2EI H
Concrete (K = 1.5)
beams and Circular 3.03 r
3m columns (K= 1.7)
EI EI EI ( 0.35
A F G
Rolled steel I-beams and Varies from
2m sections other built up 2.615 r to
2m
( 0.5 ) sections (K 2.66 r
Fig. 6: Two storey multi- bay varies from
portal frame 1.14 to 1.18)

Considering a 330mm x 230mm concrete column and


300mm x 230mm beam for the frames in Figs.7, 8, and 9,
we obtain the following parameters.
2 8 4
Acol 52900mm , I col 2.332 x10 mm
rcol 4408mm , col 35705mm col 0.004
2 2 2 2

2 2 2
Abeam 66700mm , rbeam 6998mm
I beam 4.675 x10 mm , beam 56684mm ,
8 4 2 2

beam 0.0063

Therefore, shear-modification factors for fixed end


moments are
54 2 15 1 / 3 1 = -0.975 for columns
and -0.960 for beams. The joint moments obtained using
traditional expressions for fixed end moment and shear
modified expressions for fixed end moments, for the two
storey portal frame, are shown in Figs. 7(a) and 7(b)
respectively. Tables 3, 4, and 5 show the results of the
analysis of the portal frames.

203
Effect of Shear on Stress Distribution in Redundant Frames

Table 2: Summary of shear-modified fixed end moments and support reactions

Fixing and loading Traditional fixed end Shear modified fixed end moments and
condition of beams moments and support Support Reactions
reactions

Pb L1 b2
2 2
Pb a
M0 M0
2
A: Fixed- ended
L 1 3
2
beam with point L
load 2
Pb a 1 2
Pba 2 2
ML
2
2 ML
L b 1 3
L
2
3
L 2a
Pb
Q0 Pb 3L 1 2b 1 3
2
Q0
3
L
Pab
2 L 1 3
QL
Pb 3L 1 2b 1 3 L
2 2 3
L QL

3
L 1 3 2
b

Mb Mb 1
M0 (2a b) M0 L
2 1 3
2 3a
L L
B: Fixed ended 6 Mab
Q0 6 Mab 1
Q0
3
beam with moment 3
L 1 3
L
at arbitrary point
2
2b a
Ma
along the beam ML Ma 1
ML L 3b
L 2
L 1 3
6 Mab 6 Mab 1
QL QL
3
L 1 3
3
L

qL 1 9 36
2 2 2
qL
C: Fixed ended M0 M0
beam with 12 12 3 1
uniformly qL
Q0 qL 6 1
distributed load Q0
2 3 1
2
(u.d.l)
qL 1 9 36
2 2 2
qL
ML ML
12 12 3 1
QL
qL qL 1
QL
2 2 3 1

204
International Journal of Soft Computing and Engineering (IJSCE)
ISSN: 2231-2307, Volume-2, Issue-3, July 2012

Pb b L Pb b L 3 3 L
2 2 2 2 2 2
M0 M0
2 2 2 3

D. Propped cantilever L 2 L
with point load
Pb 3L b Pb b 3 3L
2 2 2 2 2
Q0 Q0
3 3 2 3

L 2 L
ML 0 ML 0
Pb 3L b L3 Pb b 3 3L L
2 2 2 2 2 3
QL QL
L
3 2 b
3
L 2 3 b

M0
M
2
3 L b 2L
2 2 2
M0
Mb 1
2 3a
L 1 3

L
2L
E: Propped cantilever Q0
3M 2
2L
3
L b
2
Q0
3M L b
2
2 2

with moment at arbitrary L 3 2 L2
point along the beam ML 0
ML 0
QL
2L
3
3M 2
L b
2
3M L b
2 2
QL
L 3 2 2 L2

2
M0
qL2 qL 1
F: Propped cantilever M0
with u.d.l. 8 4 2 3
5 qL 5 6
Q0 qL Q0
8 4 2 3
ML 0 ML 0
3
QL qL 3qL 2 1
QL
4 3 2
8

Table 4: Results for two storey portal frame


Joint Joint Joint Deference
designation moment moment %
Table 3: Results for simple portal frame (shear (shear
Joint Joint Joint Deference neglected) included)
AB 32.20 32.38 +0.6
designation moment moment % BA 41.11 43.74 +6.4
(shear (shear BC -7.19 -7.13-36.61 -0.8
neglected) included) BE -36.92 30.67 -0.8
AB 7.284 7.409 +1.7 CB 31.19 -30.67-1.81 -1.7
CD -31.19 1.81 -1.7
BA 22.545 21.119 -6.4 DC -1.20 -2.00 +50.8
BC -22.545 -22.117 -6.4 DE 1.19 -19.82 +50.8
CB -4.401 -4.896 +11.2 ED 12.59 21.82 -22.8
CD 4.401 4.897 +11.2 EB -18.82 31.95 +5.3
EF 21.40 +2.0
DC 9.012 9.328 +3.5 FE 31.65 +9.5

205
Effect of Shear on Stress Distribution in Redundant Frames

Table 5: Results for two storey multi bay frame VI. CONCLUSION
Joint Joint Joint Deference
Shear reduces the fixed end moments of redundant
designation moment moment %
frames. The variation of stress distribution in redundant
(shear (shear
neglected) included) frames has no defined pattern . Some joint moments were
AB 24.76 25.05 +1.2 numerically lower when shear was considered than when it
BA 43.50 43.07 -1.0 was neglected while others were higher when shear was
BC -0.71 -0.70 -1.4 considered than when it was ignored. Increase / decrease in
BE -42.79 -42.37 -1.0 maximum joint moment was less than 7%. Consequently
CB 23.72 23.22 2.1 we conclude that the effect of shear on the stress
CD -23.71 -23.22 -2.1 distribution in redundant frames is not substantial and can
DC 5.04 3.51 -30.4 be ignored since the error involved can be taken care of by
DI -22.65 21.25 -6.2 the use of appropriate factor of safety for loads.
DE 17.61 17.74 7.4
EB -6.84 -8.81 28.8 REFERENCES
ED 16.09 16.23 8.7 [1] J.C. Bruch, and T.P. Mitchel, Mass-loaded clamped free
EH -45.47 43.80 -3.7 Timoshenko beam. Journal of Sound and Vibration, l3 (2), 1987, pp
EF 36.22 36.38 0.4 341-345.
FE 38.00 38.15 3.9 [2] A.K. Chugh, Stiffness matrix for a beam element including
transverse shear and axial force effect.. International Journal for
GH 33.13 33.40 0.8 Numerical Methods in Engineering, 2, 1977, pp 1681-1697.
HG 26.50 26.87 1.4 [3] A.Dakov, and V. Kuznetsov, Structural Mechanics, MIR
HE -30.04 -30.90 2.9 Publishers, Mosco, Translated from the Russian by B. Lachinov,
HI 3.54 4.03 13.8 1985
[4] T. Karamanski, T. Bobev, N. Kapitanov, T. Ganev, A. Popov, and I.
IH 7.10 7.60 7.0 Baicher, Structural Mechanics, First Edition, Technika press, Sofia,
ID -7.10 -7.60 7.0 1988.
[5] N.N. Osadebe and C.A. Chidolue, Effect of Shear Deflections on
Stiffness Coefficients and Matrix, Inter. Jour. of Engineering, 5 (4) ,
V. DISCUSSIONS AND CONCLUSION 2011, pp 169-180
[6] N.N. Osadebe and C.A. Chidolue, 2012, An Alternative First
Table 1 shows the values of shear modification factors Principle Approach for Determination of Elements of Beam Stiffness
for different materials and cross sections. Matrix, Nigerian Journal of Technology, accepted for publication.
The summary of the derived expressions for shear [7] N.N. Osadebe and B.O. Mama, 1998, Combined effect of axial load
modified fixed end moments and support reactions for and shear deformation on bending moment in framed structures.
Proceedings Fourth Structural Engineering Analysis and Modeling,
various beam fixing and loading conditions are given in SEAM 4, Accra Ghana 1998.
Table 2. The expressions within the square brackets are the [8] C.S. Reddy, Basic structural analysis. Tata McGraw-Hill Publishing
shear modification parameters which, if shear is neglected Company, New Delhi., Second edition., 1981
[ 0 , 0 , 0 ], revert the expressions to the
Chinenye Alfred Chidolue obtained B. Eng (Civil) degree from the
traditional fixed end moments and support reactions. University of Zambia , M. Eng degree (Civil and Structural) from
The fixed end moment diagrams for the two storey University of Sheffield and Ph. D. degree in Structural Engineering is
portal frame are shown in Figs. 7(a) and 7(b), from where it being awaited from University of Nigeria, Nsukka. He is currently a Senior
can be seen that shear in redundant frames decreases the lecturer in Civil Engineering Department, Nnamdi Azikiwe University,
Awka, Anambra State, Nigeria
fixed end moments.
The joint moments for the simple portal frame of Fig. 4 Chukwura Henry Aginam obtained B. Eng (Civil) degree from the
shown in Table 3 indicate that shear can increase or lower University of Nigeria Nsukka , M. Sc. Degree (Structures) from
the bending moment distribution in a redundant frame. University of Lagos, Nigeria and Ph. D. degree in Structural Engineering
from University of Nigeria, Nsukka. He is currently a Senior lecturer in
Hence, there was no defined pattern for stress variation in Civil Engineering Department, Nnamdi Azikiwe University, Awka,
the simple portal frame. Similar observations were also Anambra State, Nigeria
made for two storey portal frame of Fig. 5, Table 4, and two
storey multi-bay portal frame of Fig. 6, Table 5, where
neither increase in load nor variation in frame configuration
gave definite pattern for stress variation. For example, the
maximum hogging moment for the simple portal frame
reduced by 6.4% when shear effects were considered while
those of two storey portal frame and two storey multi-bay
frames increased by 6.4% and reduced by 3.7%
respectively, when shear is taken into consideration.
.

206

You might also like