Вы находитесь на странице: 1из 7

CLIFFORD JAY C.

ANSINO THEORY OF STRUCTURE II


5-BSCE-B

MOMENT-DISTRIBUTION METHOD

Consider a prismatic beam AB, which is hinged at end A and fixed at end B, as shown in Fig. 17.1(a). If we
apply a moment M at the end A, the beam rotates by an angle y at the hinged end A and develops a moment MBA at
the fixed end B, as shown in the figure.

Fig. 17.1

The relationship between the applied moment M and the rotation y can be established by using the slope-
deflection. By substituting M nf =M , θn=θ , and θ f =ψ =FEM nf =0 in the slope-deflection equation.

The bending stiffness, K, of a member is defined as the moment that must be applied at an end of the
member to cause a unit rotation of that end. Thus, by setting ϴ = 1 rad in, we obtain the expression for the bending
stiffness of the beam of Fig. 17.1(a) to be

When the modulus of elasticity for all the members of a structure is the same (i.e., E = constant), it is usually
convenient to work with the relative bending stiffnesses of members in the analysis. The relative bending stiffness, K,
of a member is obtained by dividing its bending stiffness, K, by 4E. Thus, the relative bending stiffness of the beam of
Fig. 17.1(a) is given by
CLIFFORD JAY C. ANSINO THEORY OF STRUCTURE II
5-BSCE-B

Now, suppose that the far end B of the beam of Fig. 17.1(a) is hinged, as shown in Fig. 17.1(b). The
relationship between the applied moment M and the rotation 𝛳 of the end A of the beam can now be determined by
using the modified slope-deflection equation. By substituting M rh =M , ϴ r =ϴ , and ψ=FEM rh=FEM hr =0 into Eq.
16.15(a), we obtain

By setting 𝛳 = 1 rad, we obtain the expression for the


bending stiffness of the beam of Fig. 17.1(b) to be

A comparison of Eqs. (17.2) and (17.5) indicates that the stiffness of the beam is reduced by 25 percent when
the fixed support at B is replaced by a hinged support. The relative bending stiffness of the beam can now be
obtained by dividing its bending stiffness by 4E:

From Eqs. (17.1) and (17.4), we can see that the relationship between the applied end moment M and the
rotation 𝛳 of the corresponding end of a member can be summarized as follows:

4 EI 3 EI
M= {( )
L
ϴ ¿¿
L ( )
ϴ ¿ if far end of memberis hinged ¿ (17.7)

Similarly, based on Eqs. (17.2) and (17.5), the bending stiffness of a member is given by

K= {4 LEI ¿¿
3 EI
L
¿ if far end of the member hinged ¿ (17.8)

And the relative bending stiffness of a member can be expressed as (see Eqs. (17.3) and (17.6)

I 3 I
K= { L
¿¿ ()
4 L
¿ if far end of themember is hinged ¿ (17.9)

CLIFFORD JAY C. ANSINO THEORY OF STRUCTURE II


5-BSCE-B

Let us consider again the hinged-fixed beam of Fig. 17.1(a). When a moment M is applied at the hinged end
A of the beam, a moment M BA develops at the fixed end B, as shown in the figure. The moment M BA is termed the
carryover moment. To establish the relationship between the applied moment M and the carryover moment M BA ,
we write the slope-deflection equation for M BA by substituting M nf =M BA ,ϴ f =ϴ , and ϴ f =ψ=FEM nf =0 into
Eq. (16.9):

By substituting ϴ=ML /(4 EI ) from Eq. (17.1) into Eq. (17.10), we obtain

As Eq. (17.11) indicates, when a moment of magnitude M is applied at the hinged end of a beam, one-half of
the applied moment is carried over to the far end, provided that the far end is fixed. Note that the direction of the
carryover moment, M BA , is the same as that of the applied moment, M.

When the far end of the beam is hinged, as shown in Fig. 17.1(b), the carryover moment M BA is zero. Thus,
we can express the carryover moment as

M BA = { M2 ¿ ¿ 0 ¿ if end of member is hinged ¿ (17.12)

The ratio of the carryover moment to the applied moment ( M BA /M ) is called the carryover factor of the
member. It represents the fraction of the applied moment M that is carried over to the far end of the member. By
dividing Eq. (17.12) by M, we can express the carryover factor (COF) as

COF= {12 ¿ ¿ 0 ¿ if far end of member ishinged ¿(17.13)

CLIFFORD JAY C. ANSINO THEORY OF STRUCTURE II


5-BSCE-B

Analysis of Continuous Beams


Based on the discussion presented in the preceding section, the procedure for the analysis of continuous
beams by the moment-distribution method can be summarized as follows:

1. Calculate distribution factors. At each joint that is free to rotate, calculate the distribution factor for each
of the members rigidly connected to the joint. The distribution factor for a member end is computed by dividing the
relative bending stiffness (I/L) of the member by the sum of the relative bending stiffnesses of all the members
rigidly connected to the joint. The sum of all the distribution factors at a joint must equal 1.

2. Compute fixed-end moments. Assuming that all the free joints are clamped against rotation, evaluate, for
each member, the fixed-end moments due to the external loads and support settlements (if any) by using the fixed-
end moment expressions given inside the back cover of the book. The counterclockwise fixed-end moments are
considered to be positive.

3. Balance the moments at all the joints that are free to rotate by applying the moment-distribution process
as follows:
a. At each joint, evaluate the unbalanced moment and distribute the unbalanced moment to the
members connected to the joint. The distributed moment at each member end rigidly connected to the joint
is obtained by multiplying the negative of the unbalanced moment by the distribution factor for the member
end.
b. Carry over one-half of each distributed moment to the opposite (far) end of the member.
c. Repeat steps 3(a) and 3(b) until either all the free joints are balanced or the unbalanced moments
at these joints are negligibly small.

4. Determine the final member end moments by algebraically summing the fixed-end moment and all the
distributed and carryover moments at each member end. If the moment distribution has been carried out
correctly, then the final moments must satisfy the equations of moment equilibrium at all the joints of the
structure that are free to rotate.

5. Compute member end shears by considering the equilibrium of the members of the structure.

6. Determine support reactions by considering the equilibrium of the joints of the structure.

7. Draw shear and bending moment diagrams by using the beam sign convention.

CLIFFORD JAY C. ANSINO THEORY OF STRUCTURE II


5-BSCE-B

Beams
Although the foregoing procedure can be used to analyze continuous beams that are simply supported at
one or both ends, the analysis of such structures can be considerably simplified by using the reduced relative
bending stiffnesses, K=3 I (4 L) , for spans adjacent to the simple end supports. When using reduced stiffnesses,
the joints at the simple end supports are balanced only once during the moment-distribution process, after which
they are left unclamped so that no moments can be carried over to them as the interior joints of the structure are
balanced.

Consider a continuous beam with a cantilever overhang, as shown in Fig. 17.6(a). Since the cantilever portion
CD does not contribute to the rotational stiffness of joint C, the distribution factor for its end C is zero ( DF CD =0 ).
Thus, joint C can be treated as a simple end support in the analysis. The moment at end C of the cantilever, however,
does affect the unbalanced moment at joint C and must be included along with the other fixed-end moments in the
analysis (Fig. 17.6(b)). Note that the cantilever portion CD is statically determinate; therefore, the moment at its end
C can be easily evaluated by applying the equation of moment equilibrium (Fig. 17.6(c)).

Fig. 17.6

CLIFFORD JAY C. ANSINO THEORY OF STRUCTURE II


5-BSCE-B

Frames
In this section, we apply the moment-distribution method to analyze frames whose joints may undergo both
rotations and translations that have not been prescribed.
Consider, for example, the rectangular frame shown in Fig. 17.14(a). A qualitative deflected shape of the
frame for an arbitrary loading is also shown in the figure using an exaggerated scale. While the fixed joints A and B of
the frame are completely restrained against rotation as well as translation, the joints C and D are free to rotate and
translate. However, since the members of the frame are assumed to be inextensible and the deformations are
assumed to be small, the joints C and D displace by the same amount, Δ, in the horizontal direction only, as shown in
the figure.

Fig. 17.14

The moment-distribution analysis of such a frame, with sidesway, is carried out in two parts. In the first part,
the sidesway of the frame is prevented by adding an imaginary roller to the structure, as shown in Fig. 17.14(b).
External loads are then applied to this frame, and member end moments are computed by applying the moment-
distribution process in the usual manner. With the member end moments known, the restraining force (reaction) R
that develops at the imaginary support is evaluated by applying the equations of equilibrium.

In the second part of the analysis, the frame is subjected to the force R, which is applied in the opposite
direction, as shown in Fig. 17.14(c). The moments that develop at the member ends are determined and
superimposed on the moments computed in the first part (Fig. 17.14(b)) to obtain the member end moments in the
actual frame (Fig. 17.14(a)). If M, M O, and M R denote, respectively, the member end moments in the actual frame,
the frame with sidesway prevented, and the frame subjected to R, then we can write (see Fig. 17.14(a), (b), and (c))

CLIFFORD JAY C. ANSINO THEORY OF STRUCTURE II


5-BSCE-B
An important question that arises in the second part of the analysis is how to determine the member end
moments M R that develop when the frame undergoes sidesway under the action of R (Fig. 17.14(c)). Since the
moment-distribution method cannot be used directly to compute the moments due to the known lateral load R, we
employ an indirect approach in which the frame is subjected to an arbitrary known joint translation ∆ ' caused by an
unknown load Q acting at the location and in the direction of R, as shown in Fig. 17.14(d). From the known joint
translation, ∆ ' ,we determine the relative translation between the ends of each member, and we calculate the
member fixed-end moments in the same manner as done previously in the case of support settlements. The fixed-
end moments thus obtained are distributed by the moment-distribution process to determine the member end
moments M Q caused by the yet-unknown load Q. Once the member end moments M Q have been determined, the
magnitude of Q can be evaluated by the application of equilibrium equations.

With the load Q and the corresponding moments M Q known, the desired moments M R due to the lateral
load R can now be determined easily by multiplying M Q by the ratio R/Q; that is,

M R= ( QR ) M (17.28)
Q

By substituting Eq. (17.28) into Eq. (17.27), we can express the member end moments in the actual frame (Fig.
17.14(a)) as

M =M O + ( QR ) M (17.29)
Q