54 CHAPTER 3 Equilibrium and Support Reactions

FIG. 3.12 Reaction Arrangements

Causing External Geometric Instability
in Plane Structures

referred to as geometrically unstable externally. The two types of re-

action arrangements that cause geometric instability in plane structures
are shown in Fig. 3.12. The truss in Fig. 3.12(a) is supported by three
parallel reactions. It can be seen from this figure that although there is
a su‰cient number of reactions ðr ¼ 3Þ, all of them are in the vertical
direction, so they cannot prevent translation of the structure in the
horizontal direction. The truss is, therefore, geometrically unstable. The
other type of reaction arrangement that causes geometric instability is
shown in Fig. 3.12(b). In this case, the beam is supported by three
nonparallel reactions. However, since the lines of action of all three re-
action forces are concurrent at the same point, A, they cannot prevent
rotation of the beam
P about point A. In other words, the moment equili-
brium equation MA ¼ 0 cannot be satisfied for a general system of
coplanar loads applied to the beam. The beam is, therefore, geometri-
cally unstable.
Based on the preceding discussion, we can conclude that in order
for a plane internally stable structure to be geometrically stable ex-
ternally so that it can remain in equilibrium under the action of any arbi-
trary coplanar loads, it must be supported by at least three reactions, all
of which must be neither parallel nor concurrent.

Static Determinacy of Internally Unstable

Structures—Equations of Condition
Consider an internally unstable structure composed of two rigid mem-
bers AB and BC connected by an internal hinge at B, as shown in Fig.
3.13(a). The structure is supported by a roller support at A and a hinged
support at C, which provide three nonparallel nonconcurrent external
reactions. As this figure indicates, these reactions, which would have
 SECTION 3.4 Static Determinacy, Indeterminacy, and Instability 55

FIG. 3.13

been su‰cient to fully constrain an internally stable or rigid structure,

are not su‰cient for this structure. The structure can, however, be made
externally stable by replacing the roller support at A by a hinged sup-
port to prevent the horizontal movement of end A of the structure.
Thus, as shown in Fig. 3.13(b), the minimum number of external reac-
tions required to fully constrain this structure is four.
Obviously, the three equilibrium equations are not su‰cient to de-
termine the four unknown reactions at the supports for this structure.
However, the presence of the internal hinge at B yields an additional
equation that can be used with the three equilibrium equations to
56 CHAPTER 3 Equilibrium and Support Reactions

determine the four unknowns. The additional equation is based on the

condition that an internal hinge cannot transmit moment; that is, the
moments at the ends of the parts of the structure connected to a hinged
joint are zero. Therefore, when an internal hinge is used to connect two
portions of a structure, the algebraic sum of the moments about the
hinge of the loads and reactions acting on each portion of the structure
on either side of the hinge must be zero. Thus, for the structure of Fig.
3.13(b), the presence of the internal hinge at B requires that the alge-
braic sum of moments about B of the loads and reactions P acting on the
individual
P BC members AB and BC must be zero; that is, MB ¼ 0 and
AB

MB ¼ 0. Such equations are commonly referred to as the equations

of condition or construction. It is important to realize that these two
equations P are not independent. When one of the two equations—for
example, P MBAB ¼ 0—is satisfied along with the moment equilibrium
equation
P BC M ¼ 0 for the entire structure, the remaining equation
MB ¼ 0 is automatically satisfied. Thus, an internal hinge connect-
ing two members or portions of a structure provides one independent
equation of condition. (The structures that contain hinged joints con-
necting more than two members are considered in subsequent chapters.)
Because all four unknown reactions for the structure of Fig. 3.13(b)
can be determined by solving P the three equations
P of equilibrium plus
one equation of condition ( MBAB ¼ 0 or MBBC ¼ 0), the structure is
considered to be statically determinate externally.
Occasionally, connections are used in structures that permit not
only relative rotations of the member ends but also relative translations
in certain directions of the ends of the connected members. Such con-
nections are modeled as internal roller joints for the purposes of analy-
sis. Figure 3.13(c) shows a structure consisting of two rigid members AB
and BC that are connected by such an internal roller at B. The structure
is internally unstable and requires a minimum of five external support
reactions to be fully constrained against all possible movements under
a general system of coplanar loads. Since an internal roller can transmit
neither moment nor force in the direction parallel to the supporting sur-
face, it provides two equations of condition;
P AB P BC
Fx ¼ 0 or Fx ¼ 0
and
P P
MBAB ¼ 0 or MBBC ¼ 0
These two equations of condition can be used in conjunction with the
three equilibrium equations to determine the five unknown external
reactions. Thus, the structure of Fig. 3.13(c) is statically determinate
externally.
From the foregoing discussion, we can conclude that if there are ec
equations of condition (one equation for each internal hinge and two
equations for each internal roller) for an internally unstable structure,
which is supported by r external reactions, then if
 SECTION 3.4 Static Determinacy, Indeterminacy, and Instability 57

r < 3 þ ec the structure is statically

unstable externally
r ¼ 3 þ ec the structure is statically
(3.9)
determinate externally
r > 3 þ ec the structure is statically
indeterminate externally

For an externally indeterminate structure, the degree of external in-

determinacy is expressed as

ie ¼ r  ð3 þ ec Þ (3.10)

Alternative Approach An alternative approach that can be used for de-

termining the static instability, determinacy, and indeterminacy of inter-
nally unstable structures is as follows:
1. Count the total number of support reactions, r.
2. Count the total number of internal forces, fi , that can be transmitted
through the internal hinges and the internal rollers of the structure.
Recall that an internal hinge can transmit two force components,
and an internal roller can transmit one force component.
3. Determine the total number of unknowns, r þ fi .
4. Count the number of rigid members or portions, nr , contained in
the structure.
5. Because each of the individual rigid portions or members of the
structure must be in equilibrium under the action of applied loads,
reactions, and/or internal forces,
P each member
P must P satisfy the
three equations of equilibrium ( Fx ¼ 0, Fy ¼ 0, and M ¼ 0).
Thus, the total number of equations available for the entire struc-
ture is 3nr .
6. Determine whether the structure is statically unstable, determinate,
or indeterminate by comparing the total number of unknowns,
r þ fi , to the total number of equations. If

r þ fi < 3nr the structure is statically

unstable externally
r þ fi ¼ 3nr the structure is statically
(3.11)
determinate externally
r þ fi > 3nr the structure is statically
indeterminate externally

For indeterminate structures, the degree of external indeterminacy

is given by
ie ¼ ðr þ fi Þ  3nr (3.12)
58 CHAPTER 3 Equilibrium and Support Reactions

FIG. 3.14

Applying this alternative procedure to the structure of Fig. 3.13(b),

we can see that for this structure, r ¼ 4, fi ¼ 2, and nr ¼ 2. As the total
number of unknowns ðr þ fi ¼ 6Þ is equal to the total number of equa-
tions ð3nr ¼ 6Þ, the structure is statically determinate externally. Sim-
ilarly, for the structure of Fig. 3.13(c), r ¼ 5, fi ¼ 1, and nr ¼ 2. Since
r þ fi ¼ 3nr , this structure is also statically determinate externally.
The criteria for the static determinacy and indeterminacy as de-
scribed in Eqs. (3.9) and (3.11), although necessary, are not su‰cient
because they cannot account for the possibility of geometric instability.
To avoid geometric instability, the internally unstable structures, like
the internally stable structures considered previously, must be supported
by reactions, all of which are neither parallel nor concurrent. An addi-
tional type of geometric instability that may arise in internally unstable
structures is depicted in Fig. 3.14. For the beam shown, which contains
three internal hinges at B; C, and D, r ¼ 6 and ec ¼ 3 (i.e., r ¼ 3 þ ec );
therefore, according to Eq. (3.9), the beam is supported by a su‰cient
number of reactions, and it should be statically determinate. However, it
can be seen from the figure that portion BCD of the beam is unstable
because it cannot support the vertical load P applied to it in its un-
deformed position. Members BC and CD must undergo finite rotations
to develop any resistance to the applied load. Such a type of geometric
instability can be avoided by externally supporting any portion of the
structure that contains three or more internal hinges that are collinear.

Example 3.1

Classify each of the structures shown in Fig. 3.15 as externally unstable, statically determinate, or statically in-
determinate. If the structure is statically indeterminate externally, then determine the degree of external indeterminacy.

Solution
(a) This beam is internally stable with r ¼ 5 > 3. Therefore, it is statically indeterminate externally with the degree
of external indeterminacy of
ie ¼ r  3 ¼ 5  3 ¼ 2 Ans.
(b) This beam is internally unstable. It is composed of two rigid members AB and BC connected by an internal
hinge at B. For this beam, r ¼ 6 and ec ¼ 1. Since r > 3 þ ec , the structure is statically indeterminate externally with the
degree of external indeterminacy of
ie ¼ r  ð3 þ ec Þ ¼ 6  ð3 þ 1Þ ¼ 2 Ans.
continued
 SECTION 3.4 Static Determinacy, Indeterminacy, and Instability 59

FIG. 3.15

Alternative Method fi ¼ 2, nr ¼ 2, r þ fi ¼ 6 þ 2 ¼ 8, and 3nr ¼ 3ð2Þ ¼ 6. As r þ fi > 3nr , the beam is statically
indeterminate externally, with
ie ¼ ðr þ fi Þ  3nr ¼ 8  6 ¼ 2 Checks
(c) This structure is internally unstable with r ¼ 4 and ec ¼ 2. Since r < 3 þ ec , the structure is statically unstable
externally. This can be verified from the figure, which shows that the member BC is not restrained against movement in
the horizontal direction. Ans.
Alternative Method fi ¼ 1, nr ¼ 2, r þ fi ¼ 4 þ 1 ¼ 5, and 3nr ¼ 6. Since r þ fi < 3nr , the structure is statically
unstable externally. Checks
(d) This beam is internally unstable with r ¼ 5 and ec ¼ 2. Because r ¼ 3 þ ec , the beam is statically determinate
externally. Ans.
Alternative Method fi ¼ 4, nr ¼ 3, r þ fi ¼ 5 þ 4 ¼ 9, and 3nr ¼ 3ð3Þ ¼ 9. Because r þ fi ¼ 3nr , the beam is stat-
icaly determinate externally. Checks

continued
60 CHAPTER 3 Equilibrium and Support Reactions

(e) This is an internally unstable structure with r ¼ 6 and ec ¼ 3. Since r ¼ 3 þ ec , the structure is statically deter-
minate externally. Ans.
Alternative Method fi ¼ 6, nr ¼ 4, r þ fi ¼ 6 þ 6 ¼ 12, and 3nr ¼ 3ð4Þ ¼ 12. Because r þ fi ¼ 3nr , the structure is
statically determinate externally. Checks
(f ) This frame is internally unstable with r ¼ 4 and ec ¼ 1. Since r ¼ 3 þ ec , the frame is statically determinate ex-
ternally. Ans.
Alternative Method fi ¼ 2, nr ¼ 2, r þ fi ¼ 4 þ 2 ¼ 6, and 3nr ¼ 3ð2Þ ¼ 6. Since r þ fi ¼ 3nr , the frame is stat-
ically determinate externally. Checks
(g) This frame is internally unstable with r ¼ 6 and ec ¼ 3. Since r ¼ 3 þ ec , the frame is statically determinate
externally. Ans.
Alternative Method fi ¼ 6, nr ¼ 4, r þ fi ¼ 6 þ 6 ¼ 12, and 3nr ¼ 3ð4Þ ¼ 12. Because r þ fi ¼ 3nr , the frame is
statically determinate externally. Checks

3.5 COMPUTATION OF REACTIONS

The following step-by-step procedure can be used to determine the re-
actions of plane statically determinate structures subjected to coplanar
loads.
1. Draw a free-body diagram (FBD) of the structure.
a. Show the structure under consideration detached from its sup-
ports and disconnected from all other bodies to which it may be
connected.
b. Show each known force or couple on the FBD by an arrow in-
dicating its direction and sense. Write the magnitude of each
known force or couple by its arrow.
c. Show the orientation of the mutually perpendicular xy coor-
dinate system to be used in the analysis. It is usually convenient
to orient the x and y axes in the horizontal (positive to the right)
and vertical (positive upward) directions, respectively. However,
if the dimensions of the structure and/or the lines of action of
most of the applied loads are in an inclined direction, selection
of the x (or y) axis in that direction may considerably expedite
the analysis.
d. At each point where the structure has been detached from a
support, show the unknown external reactions being exerted on
the structure. The type of reactions that can be exerted by the
various supports are given in Fig. 3.3. The reaction forces are
represented on the FBD by arrows in the known directions of
their lines of action. The reaction couples are represented by