A Have I solved this iterative equation correctly?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Tygra
  • Start date Start date
Tygra
Messages
55
Reaction score
8
TL;DR
Equation for computing rotations for a rigid frame
Hi all,

I have a structural engineering book from 1979. I am trying to follow it as best as I can. I have come to a formula that calculates the rotations in radians at the rigid joint that requires an iterative procedure. This equation comes in the form of:

$$ x_i = \frac {Qh_i + Qh_{i+1}}{4K} + \frac {C_{i+1}}{K}x_{i+1} + \frac {C_{i-1}}{K}x_{i-1} $$

The book says to use initial values x by using this formula:

$$x_i = \frac {Qh_i + Qh_{i+1}}{24G_i}$$

So, you can compute the rotations for each level and then using the iterative formula to improve the values of the rotations.

Now, I have used MATALB to do this.

Matlab:
x1(1) = (Q*h/4)/(24*G1)
x2(1) = (2*Q*h/4 + Q*h/4)/(24*G1)
x3(1) = (3*Q*h/4 + 2*Q*h/4)/(24*G1)
x4(1) = (4*Q*h/4 + 3*Q*h/4)/(24*G1)
x5(1) = (5*Q*h/4 + 4*Q*h/4)/(24*G1)
x6(1) = (6*Q*h/4 + 5*Q*h/4)/(24*G1)
x7(1) = (7*Q*h/4 + 6*Q*h/4)/(24*G1 + 2*C)
x8(1) = 0

for i = 1:10
     x1(i+1) = Q*h/(4*K) + C/K*x2(i);
     x2(i+1) = (Q*h + 2*Q*h)/(4*K) + C/K*x1(i) + C/K*x3(i);
     x3(i+1) = (2*Q*h + 3*Q*h)/(4*K) + C/K*x2(i) + C/K*x4(i);
     x4(i+1) = (3*Q*h + 4*Q*h)/(4*K) + C/K*x3(i) + C/K*x5(i);
     x5(i+1) = (4*Q*h + 5*Q*h)/(4*K) + C/K*x4(i) + C/K*x6(i);
     x6(i+1) = (5*Q*h + 6*Q*h)/(4*K) + C/K*x5(i) + C/K*x7(i);
     x7(i+1) = (6*Q*h + 7*Q*h)/(4*K) + C/K*x6(i);
     x8(i+1) = 0;
end

My questions is: have I solved this iterative equation correctly?

Note: C and G are the flexural stiffnesses of the columns and girders respectively; that is

$$ C = \frac {I}{h} $$
$$ G = \frac {I}{L} $$

$$K = (6G_i + C_i + C_{i+1})$$

EDIT: Q is the horizontal wind shear at each storey.

To give you a visual insight, here is a rigid frame illustrating the nodal loads and rotations at the joints:

7 Storey Rigid Frame.webp
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
Sorry, I'm having real trouble with the latex.

EDIT: Latex Sorted
 
Last edited:
Is there not anyone who can help? Should I have posted this in a different section?
 
Thread 'How to define a vector field?'
Hello! In one book I saw that function ##V## of 3 variables ##V_x, V_y, V_z## (vector field in 3D) can be decomposed in a Taylor series without higher-order terms (partial derivative of second power and higher) at point ##(0,0,0)## such way: I think so: higher-order terms can be neglected because partial derivative of second power and higher are equal to 0. Is this true? And how to define vector field correctly for this case? (In the book I found nothing and my attempt was wrong...

Similar threads

  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
675
Replies
0
Views
713
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 0 ·
Replies
0
Views
1K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
Replies
21
Views
1K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
Replies
2
Views
434
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
4K