Why Are My Bending Moment Signs Incorrect in the Direct Stiffness Method?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Tygra
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Method Stiffness
Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion centers on the incorrect signs of bending moments in a seven-storey structure analyzed using the Direct Stiffness Method. The user reports accurate magnitudes but incorrect signs, specifically noting positive moments at both the top and bottom of columns, contrary to expected patterns. The transformation matrix setup is questioned, and the user seeks validation of their approach. The conversation concludes with a suggestion for a simpler structure to test the code.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of the Direct Stiffness Method in structural analysis
  • Familiarity with local and global stiffness matrices
  • Knowledge of transformation matrices in structural engineering
  • Basic principles of bending moments and their signs in structural elements
NEXT STEPS
  • Review the formulation of local stiffness matrices in structural analysis
  • Study the application of transformation matrices in the Direct Stiffness Method
  • Learn about common mistakes in sign conventions for bending moments
  • Experiment with simpler structural models to validate stiffness method implementations
USEFUL FOR

Structural engineers, civil engineering students, and professionals involved in structural analysis and design who are looking to understand the nuances of the Direct Stiffness Method and bending moment calculations.

Tygra
Messages
55
Reaction score
8
TL;DR
Why am I getting incorrect signs
Hi there,

I was wondering if someone might know why I am getting incorrect signs for my structure that I am working on using the Direct Stiffness Method? I am following the procedure that I was taught when I was at University and I can't completely remember everything. I am designing a seven-storey structure that looks like this:

7 storey structure.png


The magnitude of the forces I am getting is accurate, but the signs are incorrect.

Here are the bending moment on the structure:

bm frame.png


You might not be able to see, but for the columns, you get a positive bending moment at the bottom of each storey and a negative bending moment at the top of the storey - this pattern is the same for each storey.

In my code I am getting positive bending moments at the top and the bottom, but like I said the magnitude is quite accurate.

Rather than post the entirity of my code, lets focus on a single column.

The local stiffness matrix for a column has the form:

LSM.png


And I set up the transformation matrix as follows:


Code:
T =

  6x6 table

              U1    V1    theta1    U2    V2    theta2
              __    __    ______    __    __    ______

    U1         0    1       0        0    0       0  
    V1        -1    0       0        0    0       0  
    theta1     0    0       1        0    0       0  
    U2         0    0       0        0    1       0  
    V2         0    0       0       -1    0       0  
    theta2     0    0       0        0    0       1


To compute the global stiffness matrix you use the equation:

1720191801904.png



This will give you the global stiffness matrix! You can then proceed to find the displacements and rotations. Then you can find the internal forces on the structure.

I guess the thing to look at is the transformation matrix. Does it seem correct to you. The local stiffness matrix is definitely correct. I know you guys might not be Structural Engineers, but I am hoping some of you have experience with the Stiffness Method.

Many thanks in advance!
 

Attachments

  • local stiffness matrix.png
    local stiffness matrix.png
    3.6 KB · Views: 83
Engineering news on Phys.org
Before I try to remove the dust from what I can recall regarding this topic.
Could you provide a WAY SIMPLER structure to test your code and our knowledge?

Something like this for example:
1723322043165.png
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
4K
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 0 ·
Replies
0
Views
2K
Replies
2
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
4K
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
739
Replies
11
Views
2K