Stiffness Matrix Method: Symmetry vs Introducing a new node / joint

Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion focuses on the Stiffness Matrix Method in structural analysis, specifically addressing the approach of introducing an additional node at the load application point. The original method utilized symmetry arguments, as outlined in "Structures: Theory and Analysis" by Williams & Todd. The participant initially proposed modifying the global stiffness matrix by doubling the entry in the bottom right corner but later corrected their approach by accurately summing the stiffness matrices of both halves, resulting in a correct global stiffness matrix that aligns with the book's solution.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of stiffness matrix formulation in structural analysis
  • Familiarity with global stiffness matrix assembly techniques
  • Knowledge of boundary conditions in structural mechanics
  • Proficiency in matrix algebra and manipulation
NEXT STEPS
  • Study the derivation of the global stiffness matrix in finite element analysis
  • Learn about the implications of symmetry in structural systems
  • Explore the effects of boundary conditions on stiffness matrices
  • Investigate advanced topics in structural dynamics and load application methods
USEFUL FOR

Structural engineers, civil engineering students, and professionals involved in finite element analysis and structural design will benefit from this discussion.

Master1022
Messages
590
Reaction score
116
TL;DR
This question is about comparing two methods in a stiffness matrix analysis question - using symmetry on half of the structure vs. introducing a new joint at the load
Hi,

In the question outlined in the images (apologies for the poor quality of the scans), the chosen solution has opted to use a symmetry argument and proceed from there.

ScannableDocumentStiffnessMatrix.jpg
StiffnessMatrix2.jpg


Question is from "Structures: theory and analysis" by Williams & Todd

My question is: How could we approach the same problem by introducing an extra node at the point where the load P acts?

Method: I believe that all we would need to do if we were considering an extra joint would be to effectively double the entry in the bottom right corner of the global stiffness matrix: (i.e.

K =<br /> \begin{pmatrix}<br /> \frac{4EI}{l} &amp; \frac{-6EI}{l^2} \\<br /> \frac{-6EI}{l^2} &amp; (\frac{24EI}{l^3} + k)\\<br /> \end{pmatrix}

and changing the force vector to: F = \begin{bmatrix} 0 \\ -P \\ \end{bmatrix}

I thought of doubling the bottom right entry of K as we would be adding it to itself again in another 2 x 2 global stiffness matrix and that would be the only parameter that we care about within K_{BC}

However, solving this yields different answers (letting EI = 1 and l = 1 for ease of typing):
\begin{bmatrix} \theta_{z_A} \\ u_{y_b} \\ \end{bmatrix} = \frac{-P}{15 + k} \begin{bmatrix} \frac{3}{2} \\ 1 \\ \end{bmatrix}.

Can anyone see where I have gone wrong in my thinking here?

Thanks in advance
 
Engineering news on Phys.org
Update: I realized that I added up the stiffness matrices of the right and left half incorrectly.

The global stiffness matrix (for variables \theta_{z_A}, u_{y_B}, \theta_{z_C} respectively) should have been:
<br /> \begin{pmatrix}<br /> \frac{4EI}{l^3} &amp; \frac{-6EI}{l^2} &amp; 0 \\<br /> \frac{-6EI}{l^2} &amp; \frac{24EI}{l^3} + k &amp; \frac{6EI}{l^2} \\<br /> 0 &amp; \frac{6EI}{l^2} &amp; \frac{4EI}{l^3}<br /> \end{pmatrix}
Using this matrix leads to the same result as in the book.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • · Replies 33 ·
2
Replies
33
Views
3K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
3K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
2K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
1K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
Replies
31
Views
3K
Replies
31
Views
4K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K