Remembering the Column Analogy by M. A. Sozen Synopsis To my friend and hero Professor $Gkri Muvaffak Oziimeri, a bouquet of thoughts and an invention of another hero, Professor Hardy Cross. Keywords: column analogy; Hardy Cross; theory24 Sozen Mete A. Svea, Kentelbur Distinguished Professor of Stnuctursd Engineering Purdue University, specializes i teaching. and research related. to come fourlding and massive srsetures subjected to static and dynamic lids. Curcently hhe chairs the National Research Council Commitiee for Oversight and Aswessment of Bhistetfects and Related Research and the Nations! Science Foundatisn US-Japan ‘Technical Coordination Committee for Cooperative Rescarch in Lrtan Eanthquake Disaster Mitigation, 1 as een sell that it took an age to understand Aristotle and another ae t0 forget him. Mardy Cross may have been forgotten cven before he was understood. IC his name i mentioned at all today, he as remembered through his ccontibution tthe soletion of bending mocents ia stuetural frames and flew in petwarks, Sometimes he is even dismissed as a sleepwalker who stumbled on she relaxation methed for solution of linear simultaneous equations Actally. his lose friends and students have said that Cross tended ta advise stensously against the use of the moment distibution method because he considered it to be 160 exact for inexact structures. Cross's influence on the profession of stuctural engineering & indelible and swesome. At the same time, itis subtle and easy to overlook. To get a flavor of his approach, consider his class notes fora course on Indeterminate structures Before he goes into explanations, he questions What is theory? tis perhaps worthwhile to eal attention to the ‘ouble use ofthe word “theory” in scientific discussions. Tn seine ‘cases i is used fo mean 4 body 0€ group of fats the uth of which 45 not questioned, in oxhers it means a hypothesis which has strang ‘evidence in its 13¥o hough its cuts e sl open to some question, ‘Ths the theary of elasticity is @ group of geometrical eelations hich ace not open th debate, but the idea that time yield of the concrete will delay failure from temperature stresses in a eoncrete arch ig a mieory in quite a diferent sense. Other debatable points fn mdcterminste sirsctutes. are not thearies at wll, but oberely oavement assumptions: thus no one holds any theory that the ‘modulus of elasticity is constant throughout an arch fing, the oly question being whether such variations as do cecur produce a irmportane effet onthe results. “Theory. te Cross is te axiom. He does noc think that plane genmercy neous 0 be proven for plane comin, Tut the siudent is eastioned against mixing “theory” and “theory in a quite different sense.” All thar is based on (he observed is fefutable. He expantls om S.M.Uzumeri Symposium = 25 Much confusion of thought fis come from misuse of this term fibers}. We ray farier cite: as groups of facts not open to experactation oF debate the theory ofthe clastic ar, the theory of eantnunis geder, the Ueory of deflection; as bypotheses Strongly supported mul as yet not fly proved. The theories of {augue failure, tbe theory of earth presuze, the theory thatthe sucngth of cones ina sucture isthe same as that shown by 4 cylinder ina testing racine or that rate of application of load is & nepligile factor in praacingIniore, and finaly, as aiuses ofthe sword, the “theory” that he moment of ina af a concrete beam ‘aries as bd thatthe tension rods do not slip in concrete bears, that tere is no distorion due 10 shear The fist group of “incries* si ‘not _debaable, the second depend usally on experiments! verfistion, while am the case of ihe thi the imporant question is how sigufican is be enor. The data often seeded in the hid group ate elementary: when these are avaiable, Geductve proveses farts» definite answer a co the mnpartance oftheener ‘Taxonomy of te conceptual models was not his sole eoncern. His preoccupation ‘was with engineering thinking and design in general. He never expressed it Oat sway, but his constant guest was to determine whether or in which ease an exact analysis of an approximate model was an approximate analysis of the exact rode! Hee sought simplicity: “The analysis of a structure for continuity should be lest ‘complicated than the determination of anchorage and stip spacing...” 13s froniea! that his wish came true, not because continuity analysis was simplified but because the determination of anchorage and stcrep spscing was made. more difficui by illuminati who prefered the ngidity of rules co the flexibilty of principles. He revered states: No indeterminate analysis ~ no structural analysis of any kind is compiete until the computer has satisfied himself (1) hat the forces balance, at least within the accuracy of the computation used, (2) that he has not overlooked any forces.” Jn our time, this wish was also fulfilled with the exception that tragically “hirmsel” became “itselP” and “he” became “i.” The following paraphrase from ‘an announcement by an insitsion that prides itself on being at the cutting edge of * atlantic are bce on suneatumpions wich ace nt quite acordsace wis thefts ‘Bom hoc cet flow tha the colon of be naps are mot very sets the fist fom Rel 2.73) Rel 2.72 whee26 Sozen knowledge captures the istellectzal fiyhion: “The advanced experimental capcbiiies Wil enable Us to stand aledate more complex and eonprenensive Analyicul sud computer numerical mode's to improve design ural performance.” In the complex an comprehensive environmesnt envisioned, wil dhe compuiet (it, he, oe she} check siaple equilibrium? Fat chance! Tradattoritradkeors, 301s unit to Cross to pretend to synthesize his view with a few quoustions misplaced in time. The reader is urged ta read references + ‘hough d. If heishe has already done so, befhe is urgee fo return to them, They ‘ill give hirnfier different insights, always valuable, a different times. In the text below. 2 conceptual invention of his is diseussed primacily to ihstrate Cooss's creativity. How he arived at his moment-disuibution method ean be undestood with dificult, in tems of deformations and the stiffness method. But his “Column Analogy” can only be classed ab an artistic leap of imagina:ion. Ihe Cotvmn Analogy Wn is very interesting that Professor Cross started his lectures (Ref. 1} on indeterminate seuctutes by efering to “ree easily established principles.” 1. Colursn Analogy 2 Distribution of Moment 3. Virwal Work OF the aneee principles he emphasized, the moment distribution survives, sometimes for the wrong feasons. Virtual work, being atheary and not developed ‘bot elegantly defines by Cross, has been @ perennial, But the column anabogy has been lost. I deserves recycling. The column analogy is essentially a theoreen for finding indeteraynate moments ina one-spax restrained beam, Wha is important and useful about its at it applies to straight and curved beams, It can be a very useful ial for determining flexural stfiness properties of nonprismatie beats, ‘To appreciate Cross's leap of imuginaion, fet us examine the simplest column analogy application, Consider a prismatic beam with fixed ends over a span LI loaded at mid-span by a concentrated load P, What ae tie restraining moments atthe ends? ‘To solve the problem, Cross takes us to an imagined world. Jn that world, the ‘beam is represented hy a section (section of ar imagined or anslogous coli) with depth Z ang thickness 1/27 where Bs the Young's modulus for the material Of the beam and 1 i$ its moment of inertia. This imaginary section responds lineaely to an imagined lead represented by the angle-change diegram, M/E, Aiserbuted over the section jus as the moment, Ms éstibuted over the span of a simply-cupported beam S.M. Uzumeri Symposium — 27 “The unit stresses at the ends, in te imagines wold, te the moments sought ’, Mag = fot Pe AEE Pe mae Peaong! Total Load onthe analogous section on ¢1/2)4PL/43(L) Avming | Area of analogousseetion or ET 16 the load on the beam is uniform, 2 wil BE _ wet See Le The operation is so simple that the correctness of the results appears 19 be coincidence, but itis not. Plates | through V present examples. Plate 1 contains the column-enalogy solution for a concentrated load at any Sistance aL trom one end ofa prismatic beam with fixed ends, The extension of this model to a similar beam with uniform load is described in Place H. 1810 be noted that the stresses in the imagined world are calculated from the familie expression hence the term “catamn analogy.” The column analogy has ils best use it deiermining fixed-end moments and stiffresses for songrismalic beams. An ation is demonstrated in Plate TI ‘The solution, given in Plate TV, for a concentrated load on a prismatic beam with fone end fired and the othe: fe, takes vs dawn the rabbithole to the Queen of Hearts, Cross wants us to imagine a section which has an ifiete width over an infinitesimal length. The only thing that che observer ean say is that she has s0@ the unimaginable and it works, The application is also a witness 0 Cross's rare ability to associate images ‘The example in Plate V is simply to show an application involving a frame. ‘Though it is simple, its use connot be recommended vis 2 vs alker curren methods. But it does demonswate tht Cross's Analogy can be used for “one cell” James, arches, and curved beams,28 Sozen Concluding Remarks CCross's writin works we teplete with jewels of thought, Sore, contained in references | and 2, are eavonably well known. Batic nol a waste of print to evi is julyraent shout the resnlts of analysis rendered in relation to stesses Computed if archos ie reference 3 ne ynatgy? BE wa) Ue emi he na eraser yt MILT agra a ve Lea) 3 flows en A. the enunicelacksisemomnent ating on the anslopa coun is ‘seat 1 $.M, Urumeri Symposium 41 substi 2 Peg ve Mantog” Petia) (2 a) Step 2: Section Properties of Analogous Colurmn analog” Because the cent ofthe analagovs-colsmn scion i a B latog = lnaleg ” "Er ‘Sap 3: Normal Stresses on Seetion of Analogous Column Hecause Agaalog = the nowna-sess ter dseppetr, aqt prtwli-a) (2-2) . Moment ot Ala) = ¢-P-a(1-a){2-2) Manat at a0} 81 Variation of MPL ot A with42 Sozen FRAME WITH CONCENTRATED LOAD. Prismatic Columns and Girder rey enter tns LE | 6 e £ A o I [ 1 Definitions ond Default Values Youn’ Modulus Moreno enti Columns 4, Moinent ef ents af Gide Span ' eset [and Appied st emer Gide Span ® sheet 8. M,Uzumeri Symposium 43 runey ‘Peopertin of Analogous Section Cenaoidal Distance fran 1 2 BI El, ‘Moment f Inertia of Analogous Column Section ‘Cree Sectional Area of Amsiogous Colic 2 Santos = Fh, ao By Panalog , Manatog Yo Mone oy = fest , Maa Aapalog analog Pace, Masso“) Fanatog ——Taralog Momen sta, - 040 Aanatog = * Panalog = 925 > 068 Manatog wt? my 998 wi44 Sozen