Can a Stiffness Matrix Be Antisymmetric in Neutrally Stable Structures?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Pooty
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Matrix Stiffness
Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion centers on the assembly of the stiffness matrix in Finite Element Analysis (FEA) for neutrally stable structures, emphasizing that the stiffness matrix must be symmetric. The user initially encountered an antisymmetric stiffness matrix and sought clarification on special cases that could allow for this. Two definitions of stiffness coefficients were presented, both deemed correct depending on the perspective of cause and effect. The user successfully resolved the symmetry issue and calculated the K11 stiffness value as k1 + k2 for a 2x2 stiffness matrix involving a horizontal rigid beam with specified boundary conditions.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of Finite Element Analysis (FEA)
  • Knowledge of stiffness matrix assembly
  • Familiarity with boundary conditions in structural analysis
  • Concept of degrees of freedom (DOF) in mechanical systems
NEXT STEPS
  • Study the Muller-Breslau theorem in detail
  • Learn about boundary condition implementation in FEA
  • Explore the implications of stiffness matrix symmetry in structural stability
  • Investigate advanced stiffness matrix assembly techniques in FEA software
USEFUL FOR

Structural engineers, students in Finite Element Analysis courses, and professionals involved in mechanical system design and analysis.

Pooty
Messages
31
Reaction score
0
So, I am trying to assemble the Stiffness Matrix in my Finite Element Analysis course (Structures) and I keep coming out with a stiffness matrix that is not symmetric. I learned that for any neutrally stable structure, the stiffness matrix must be symmetric. Are there special cases that I am not taking into account that may allow for it to be antisymmetric? Thanks.

Also, this might seem sort of redundant but I actually look at these two definitions in a different light. Maybe someone could shed some light on the definition of a stiffness coefficient for me but I was given 2 definitions.

Kij

Definition 1: The Force at i caused by a unit displacement at j
Definition 2: The Force at i required to cause a unit displacement at j

If someone is really good at setting up stiffness matrices I would love to post what I got.
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
Look at the Muller-Breslau theorem,(that the deflection at A due to a force P at B is equal to the deflection at B due to the same force P at A) and maybe that will reveal (1) the symmetry of the stiffness matrix and (2) the definitions you give follow from each other? That's just a suggestion for you to consider. I may be wrong though.
 
Did you assemble boundary conditions into your stiffness matrix yet? Or not yet?

Both stiffness coefficient definitions you listed appear correct. It just depends on what you consider to be the cause, and effect. In definition 1, the displacement is arbitrarily said to be the cause. In definition 2, the force is arbitrarily said to be the cause. It is two ways to state the same thing.
 
Pongo, Thanks. I got the symmetry to work out. I will have to look at the problem in the way you are talking about to see if that makes if visually easier. My problem is visualizing how the freebody reacts to imposed loads and displacements.

NVN, The boundary conditions were set for me. It was a horizontal rigid beam of length 2L. Spring with constant k1 at the far left and spring with constant k2 in the middle.

I was told that my DOF's were vertical displacement at the left end and rotational displacement at the left end. I had a hard time picturing that when I displace the left end 1 unit in the vertical direction the whole beam raises as opposed to just the left side. I figured it out and got the K11 stiffness to be k1 + k2. It was a 2x2 stiffness matrix.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 0 ·
Replies
0
Views
2K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
4K
Replies
3
Views
3K
Replies
2
Views
5K
Replies
2
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
Replies
2
Views
7K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
6K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
7K