Displacement in external redundant truss

Click For Summary
The discussion focuses on determining the correct redundant support force in a truss problem, specifically at pinned support E. The author initially considers the vertical force at E as redundant but realizes this leads to instability in the truss, as a vertical force is necessary to balance moments. It is concluded that the horizontal support force at E should be taken as the redundant force instead. The symmetry of the loading and truss geometry suggests equal vertical reactions at the supports and equal but opposite horizontal reactions, if applicable. The thread also includes a request for assistance with a related question on moment sign conventions.
fonseh
Messages
521
Reaction score
2

Homework Statement


In this question , the author doesn't stated which direction ( either horozintal support of the pinned E or the vertical support force at pinned E to be selected as redundant ) . So , I tried this problem by applying the vertical force support at E as redundant .

Homework Equations

The Attempt at a Solution


I have done the step 1 , which is to find all the member force in the truss . ( The working is not shown here) .

However , I am having problem in part 2 , which is to find the member force by applying 1 unit load (virtual foce) ... By doing so , all the external force is removed and the new member forces are to be found .

I used ALTERNATIVE method to find the forces in the member . However , i can't balance the forces at joint C . What's wrong with my working ?
 

Attachments

  • 618.PNG
    618.PNG
    11.5 KB · Views: 670
  • _20170408_213615.JPG
    _20170408_213615.JPG
    44.7 KB · Views: 517
Physics news on Phys.org
You cannot take the vertical force at E as the redundant force, because then the truss becomes unstable, since there must be a vertical force at E to balance moments about A.
 
  • Like
Likes CivilSigma and fonseh
PhanthomJay said:
You cannot take the vertical force at E as the redundant force, because then the truss becomes unstable, since there must be a vertical force at E to balance moments about A.
So , the only way is to take the horizontal support force at E as redundant ?
 
fonseh said:
So , the only way is to take the horizontal support force at E as redundant ?
That is correct. It is also worthy to note that the loading and truss geometry are both very symmetrical, so one would expect equal vertical reactions at each support, and equal but opposite horizontal reactions, if non zero, at the supports.
 
  • Like
Likes fonseh
PhanthomJay said:
That is correct. It is also worthy to note that the loading and truss geometry are both very symmetrical, so one would expect equal vertical reactions at each support, and equal but opposite horizontal reactions, if non zero, at the supports.
Thanks for your effort . Btw , can you help me with this question ?
https://www.physicsforums.com/threads/moments-sign-convention-in-beam.910959/
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
4K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
Replies
3
Views
5K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
6K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K