CHAPTER-1

INTRODUCTION
1.1 INDETERMINATE STRUCTURES
Structure is an assemblage of a number of components like slabs, beams, columns,
walls, foundations and so on, which remains in equilibrium. It has to satisfy the
fundamental criteria of strength, stiffness, economy, durability and compatibility, for
its existence. It is generally classified into two categories as Determinate and
Indeterminate structures or Redundant Structures. Any structure is designed for the
stress resultants of bending moment, shear force, deflection, torsional stresses, and
axial stresses. If these moments, shears and stresses are evaluated at various critical
sections, then based on these, the proportioning can be done. Evaluation of these
stresses, moments and forces and plotting them for that structural component is
known as analysis. Determination of dimensions for these components of these
stresses and proportioning is known as design. Determinate structures are analyzed
just by the use of basic equilibrium equations. By this analysis, the unknown reactions
are found for the further determination of stresses. Redundant or indeterminate
unknown reactions are found for the further determination of stresses. Redundant or
indeterminate structures are not capable of being analyzed by mere use of basic
equilibrium equations. Along with the basic equilibrium equations, some extra
conditions are required to be used like compatibility conditions of deformations etc. to
get the unknown reactions for drawing bending moment and shear force diagrams.
Example of determinate structures are: simply supported beams, cantilever beams,
single and double overhanging beams.
Examples of indeterminate structures are: fixed beams, continuous beams, fixed
arches, two hinged arches, portals, multistoried frames, etc.
Special methods like strain energy method, slope deflection method, moment
distribution method, column analogy method, virtual work method, matrix methods,
etc are used for the analysis of redundant structures.

Indeterminate Structures: a structure is termed as statically indeterminate, if it cannot

be analyzed from principles of statics alone, i.e.

A statically indeterminate structure may be classified as:

1. Externally indeterminate, (example: continuous beams and frames shown in
figure1.1(a) and (b)).
2. Internally indeterminate, (example: trusses shown in figure1.1(c) and (d)).
3. Both externally and internally indeterminate, (example: trussed beams,
continuous trusses shown in figure1.1(e) and (f)).

Fig-1.1(a) ,1.1(b),1.1(c),1.1(d).

1.2 EXTERNALLY INDETERMINATE STRUCTURES:

A structure is usually externally indeterminate or redundant if the reactions at the
supports cannot be
2

determined by using three equations of equilibrium, i.e.

. In the case of beams subjected to vertical loads
only, two reactions can be determined by conditions of equilibrium. Therefore,
simply supported cantilever and overhanging beams shown in figure 1.2 are statically
determinate structures.

Fig-1.2
If, however a beam rests on more than two supports or in addition any of the end
support is fixed, there are more than two reactions to be determined. These reactions
4

cannot be determined by conditions of equilibrium alone. The degree of

indeterminacy or redundancy is given by the number of extra or redundant reactions
to be determined. The beam shown in figure 1.3(a) is statically indeterminate to one
degree because
there are three unknown reactions and statics has only two reactions. The beam in
figure 1.3(b) is statically redundant to two degrees. The beam in figure 1.3(c) is
redundant to three degrees and the beam in figure 1.3(d) is redundant to four degrees.

Fig-1.3(a),1.3(b),1.3(c),1.3(d)
A portal frame is statically determinate if there are only three external reactions,
because there are three conditions of equilibrium for such a system. The portal frame
shown in figure 1.4 are statically determinate because there are only three reactions to
be determined. If a portal frame has more than three reactions it is statically
indeterminate, the degree of indeterminacy or redundancy being equal to the number
of redundant or extra reactions to be determined. Therefore, the portal frames of
figure 1.5(a) and 1.5(b) are redundant by one degree, that of figure 1.5(c) is redundant
5

by two degrees, that of figure 1.5(d) is redundant by three degrees, and that of figure
1.5(e) is redundant by 5 degrees.

Fig-1.4 ,
Fig 1.5(a),1.5(b),1.5(c)

Fig-1 1.5(d),1.5(e)
The statically indeterminate beams and frames can be analysed by strain energy
method, three moment equation, slope deflection method or moment distribution
method.

1.3 INTERNALLY INDETERMINATE STRUCTURES

A truss is statically determinate internally if the total number of members
m=2j 3
where j= number of joints.
A truss having more than (2j 3) members is statically indeterminate or redundant,
the degree
of indeterminacy or redundancy being equal to the number of extra members.

Fig-1.6(a),1.6(b)
Thus the truss shown in figure 1.6(a) is statically redundant by one degree because
there are 14 members and 8
joints.
Number of redundant members = m= 2j 3
= 14 (16 3) = 1
Similarly, the truss shown in figure 1.6(b) is internally redundant by two degrees.
The internally indeterminate trusses can be analysed by strain energy method.

1.4 EXTERNALLY AND INTERNALLY INDETERMINATE STRUCTURES

A truss is statically determinate, both externally and internally when
(a) All the reactions can be determined from the conditions of equilibrium, namely
, and
(b) The total number of members, m= 2j 3, where j= number of joints.
The truss shown in figure 1.7 is externally indeterminate to one degree because the
numbers of reactions to be determined are three, and the conditions of equilibrium

reduces to two, namely

. This truss is also internally

indeterminate to one degree because there is one extra member.

Number of redundant member = m (2j 3)= 22 (2 x 12 3)= 1
Such trusses can be analysed by using strain energy method.

Fig-1.7
DIFFERENCE

BETWEEN

DETERMINATE

AND

INDETERMINATE

STRUCTURES
S.

Determinate Structures

Indeterminate Structures

No.
1

Equilibrium conditions are fully

adequate to analyse the structure.
Bending moment or shear force

at any section is independent of

the material property of the

Conditions of equilibrium are not adequate

to fully
analyse the structure.
Bending moment or shear force at any
section

depends upon the material property.

structure.
The bending moment or shear The bending moment or shear force at any
3

force at any section is

section

independent of the cross-section or

depends upon the cross-section or moment

moment of inertia.
of inertia.
Temperature variations do not
Temperature variations cause stresses.
cause stresses.
No stresses are caused due to lack

of fit.

Stresses are caused due to lack of fit.

Table 1.1
9

1.6 STATIC INDETERMINACY

In statics, a structure is statically indeterminate (or hyper static) when the static
equilibrium equations are insufficient for determining the internal forces and reactions
on that structure.
Based on Newton's laws of motion, the equilibrium equations available for a twodimensional body are
F: the vectorial sum of the forces acting on the body equals zero. This translates to
H = 0: the sum of the horizontal components of the forces equals zero;
V = 0: the sum of the vertical components of forces equals zero;
M: the sum of the moments (about an arbitrary point) of all forces equals zero.

Fig-1.8
Free body diagram of a statically indeterminate beam.
In

the beam construction

on

the

right,

the

four

unknown

reactions

are VA, VB, VC and HA. The equilibrium equations are:

V = 0:
VA Fv + VB + VC = 0
H = 0:
HA Fh = 0
MA = 0:
Fv a VB (a + b) - VC (a + b + c) = 0.
Since there are four unknown forces (or variables) (VA, VB, VC and HA) but only three
equilibrium equations, this system of simultaneous equations does not have a unique
solution.

The

structure

is

therefore
10

classified

as statically

indeterminate.

Considerations in the material properties and compatibility in deformations are taken

to solve statically indeterminate systems or structures.
If the support at B is removed, the reaction VB cannot occur, and the system
becomes statically determinate (or isostatic). Note that the system is completely
constrained here. The system becomes an exact constraint kinematic coupling. The
solution to the problem is
If, in addition, the support at A is changed to a roller support, the number of reactions
are reduced to three (without HA), but the beam can now be moved horizontally; the
system

becomes unstable or partially

constraineda mechanism rather

than

structure. In order to distinguish between this and the situation when a system under
equilibrium is perturbed and becomes unstable, it is preferable to use the
phrase partially constrained here. In this case, the 2 unknowns VA and VC can be
determined by resolving the vertical force equation and the moment equation
simultaneously. The solution yields the same results as previously obtained. However,
it is not possible to satisfy the horizontal force equation unless .
Static indeterminacy is the existence of a non-trivial (non-zero) solution to the
homogeneous system of equilibrium equations. It indicates the possibility of selfstress (stress in the absence of an external load) that may be induced by mechanical or
thermal action.

CONTINUOUS BEAMS
Beams are made continuous over the supports to increase structural integrity. A
continuous beam provides an alternate load path in the case of failure at a section. In
regions with high seismic risk, continuous beams and frames are preferred in
buildings and bridges. A continuous beam is a statically indeterminate structure.
The advantages of a continuous beam as compared to a simply supported beam are as
follows.
1) For the same span and section, vertical load capacity is more.
2) Mid span deflection is less.

11

3) The depth at a section can be less than a simply supported beam for the same
span. Else, for the same depth the span can be more than a simply supported

End span

Intermediate span

beam.
The continuous beam is economical in material.
4) There is redundancy in load path.
Possibility of formation of hinges in case of an extreme event.
5) Requires less number of anchorages of tendons.
6) For bridges, the number of deck joints and bearings are reduced.
Reduced maintenance

There are of course several disadvantages of a continuous beam as compared to a

simply supported beam.
1)
2)
3)
4)

Difficult analysis and design procedures.

Difficulties in construction, especially for precast members.
Increased frictional loss due to changes of curvature in the tendon profile.
Increased shortening of beam, leading to lateral force on the supporting

columns.
5) Secondary stresses develop due to time dependent effects like creep and
shrinkage, settlement of support and variation of temperature.
6) The concurrence of maximum moment and shear near the supports needs
proper detailing of reinforcement.
7) Reversal of moments due to seismic force requires proper analysis and design.

12

End span

Intermediate span

Fig-1.9 Continuous beams in buildings and bridges

FIXED BEAMS:
A fixed or a build in beam has both of its ends rigidly fixed so that the slope at the
ends remains zero. Such a beam is also called as the encastre beam. The fixed ends
give rise to fixing moments there in addition to the reactions.
If perfect end fixing can be achieved, build in beams carry smaller maximum bending
moments and have smaller deflections that the corresponding simply supported beams
with the same loads applied. Therefore, they are stronger and stiffer. However, the
need for high accuracy in aligning the supports and fixing the ends during erection
increases the cost. Small subsidence of either support or temperature changes can set
up large stresses. The end fixings are also normally sensitive to vibrations and
fluctuations in bending moments.
Fixed Beam with Central Point Load.
Consider a fixed beam carrying a central concentrated load W as shown in Fig. The
fixing moment and free moment diagrams are shown in Fig 1.10(b) and 1.10(c)
respectively Whereas Fig 1.10(d) is the resultant B.M. diagram. SFD in fig 1.10(e).

13

Fixed Beam with Uniformly Distributed Load

For the fixed beam carrying uniformly distributed load as shown in Fig 1.11, due to
symmetrical loading.

14

MA = MB

A1 = - MA x l

15

16

Fig 1.11

Cantilever Beams
A cantilever is a rigid structural element, such as a beam or a plate, anchored at only
one end to a (usually vertical) support from which it is protruding. Cantilevers can
also be constructed with trusses or slabs. When subjected to a structural load, the
cantilever carries the load to the support where it is forced against by a moment and
shear stress.
Cantilever construction allows for overhanging structures without external bracing, in
contrast to constructions supported at both ends with loads applied between the
supports, such as a simply supported beam found in a post and lintel system.
17

The following figure illustrates the cantilevers in buildings and bridges schematically.
(a) Cantilever in a building frame

(b) Cantilevers in a bridge girder

Fig-1.12 Cantilevers in buildings and bridges

MOMENT DISTRIBUTION METHOD

18

The moment-distribution method proposed by Hardy Cross in 1932, actually solves

these equations by the method of successive approximations. In this method, the
results may be obtained to any desired degree of accuracy. Until recently, the
moment-distribution method was very popular among engineers. It is very simple and
is being used even today for preliminary analysis of small structures. It is still being
taught in the classroom for the simplicity and physical insight it gives to the analyst
even though stiffness method is being used more and more. Had the computers not
emerged on the scene, the moment-distribution method could have turned out to be a
very popular method.
In moment-distribution method, counterclockwise beam end moments are taken as
positive. The counterclockwise beam end moments produce clockwise moments on
the joint Consider a continuous beam ABCD as shown in Fig.1.12(a). In this beam,
ends A and D are fixed and hence,A =D =0 .Thus, the deformation of this beam is
completely defined by rotations B and C at joints B and C respectively.
The required equation to evaluate

and

is obtained by considering equilibrium of

joints B and C. Hence,

MB = 0
MC = 0

MBA +MBC =0

MCB +MCD =0

Fig-1.12a Continuous Beam

Fig-1.12b Continuous Beam with fixed end joints

19

Fig-1.12c Free body diagram of joints B

Conjugate Beam
Conjugate beam is defined as the imaginary beam with the same dimensions (length)
as that of the original beam but load at any point on the conjugate beam is equal to the
bending moment at that point divided by EI. The conjugate-beam method is an
engineering method to derive the slope and displacement of a beam. The conjugatebeam method was developed by H. Mller-Breslau in 1865. Essentially, it requires the
same amount of computation as the moment-area theorems to determine a beam's
slope or deflection; however, this method relies only on the principles of statics, so its
application will be more familiar
OBJECTIVE

Introduction to statically indeterminate structure.

Analysis of statically indeterminate beam using slope deflection method and

Eulers stress analysis method

To analyse and calculate the slope -deflection of the indeterminate beams and
frames

To compare the maximum stress and deflection with the package (software).

20

SCOPE OF THE STUDY

Perform beam analysis in MARC using Msc user interface as a tool, to study the
behavior of beams with different end conditions when subjected to external static
loads of different behaviors. The study extends to determining the shear force &
bending moment diagrams and deflection profiles of beams, bending moment and
deflection for different loading conditions on single type of beam.
Within the proportional limit the material obeys Hookes law

CHAPTER-2
LITERATURE REVIEW
Mainly, beams are of two kinds taking into consideration of shearing deformation,
thickness & length of the beam. Those are Euler-Bernoulli beam & Timoshenko
Beam. The comparative study of both the beam applying various boundary conditions
has been studied by many scientists. The review consists of papers of different
journals which are mentioned in at adequate place.
A beam is defined as a structure having one of its dimensions much larger than the
other two. The axis of the beam is defined along that longer dimension, and a crosssection normal to this axis is assumed to smoothly vary along the span or length of the
beam. Civil engineering structures often consist of an assembly or grid of beams with
cross-sections having shapes such as T's or I's. A large number of machine parts also
are beam-like structures: lever arms, shafts, etc. Finally, several aeronautical
structures such as wings and fuselages can also be treated as thin-walled beams.
The solid mechanics theory of beams, more commonly referred to simply as beam
theory, plays an important role in structural analysis because it provides the designer
21

with a simple tool to analyze numerous structures. Although more sophisticated tools,
such as the finite element method, are now widely available for the stress analysis of
complex structures, beam models are often used at a pre-design stage because they
provide valuable insight into the behavior of structures. Such calculations are also
quite useful when trying to validate purely computational solutions.

DISPLACEMENT METHOD OF ANALYSIS

In the displacement method of analysis, the primary unknowns are the
displacements. In this method, first force -displacement relations are computed and
subsequently equations are written satisfying the equilibrium conditions of the
structure. After determining the unknown displacements, the other forces are
calculated satisfying the compatibility conditions and force displacement relations.
The displacement-based method is amenable to computer programming and hence
the method is being widely used in the modern day structural analysis.
In general, the maximum deflection and the maximum stresses are small as
compared to statically determinate structure. For example, consider two beams of
identical cross section and span carrying uniformly distributed load as shown in
Fig. 2.1a and Fig. 2.1b.

22

Fig 2.1a and 2.1b

The equilibrium of forces is written by expressing the unknown joint
displacements in terms of load by using load displacement relations. These
equilibrium equations are solved for unknown joint displacements. In the next step,
the unknown reactions are computed from compatibility equations using force
displacement relations. In displacement method, three methods which are closely
related to each other will be discussed.
1) Slope-Deflection Method
2) Moment Distribution Method
3) Direct Stiffness Method

SLOPE DEFLECTION METHOD

The slope-deflection method is a procedure for analyzing indeterminate beams and
frames. It is known as a displacement method since equilibrium. equations, which are
used in the analysis, are expressed in terms of unknown joint displacements.
The slope-deflection method is important because it introduces the student to the
stiffness method of analysis. This method is the basis: of many general-purpose
computer programs for analyzing all types of structures beams, trusses; shells, and
so forth. In addition, moment distributiona commonly used hand method for
analyzing beams and frames rapidly is also based on the stiffness formulation.
In the slope-deflection method an expression, called the slope deflection equation, is
used to relate the moment at each end of a member both to the end displacements of
the member and to the loads applied to the member between its ends. End
displacements of a member can include both a rotation and a translation perpendicular
to the member's longitudinal axis.
Illustration of the Slope-Deflection Method
To introduce the main features of the slope-deflection method, we briefly outline the
analysis of a two-span continuous beam. As shown in Figure 2.2a, the structure
23

consists of a single member supported by rollers at points A and B and a pin at C. We

imagine that the structure can be divided into beam segments AB and BC and joints
A, B, and C by passing planes through the beam an infinitesimal distance before and
after each support (see Fig. 2.2b). Since the joints are essentially points in space, the
length of each member is equal to the distance between joints. In this problem OA,
8B, and 8c, the rotational displacements of the joints (and also the rotational
displacements of the ends of the members), are the unknowns. These displacements
are shown to an exaggerated scale by the dashed line in Figure 2.2a. Since the
supports do not move vertically, the lateral displacements of the joints are zero; thus
there are no unknown joint translations in this example.
To begin the analysis of the beam by the slope-deflection method, we use the slopedeflection equation (which we will derive shortly) to express the moments at the ends
of each member in terms of the unknown joint displacements and the applied loads.

We next write equilibrium equations that express the condition that the joints are in
equilibrium with respect to the applied moments; that is, the sum of the moments
applied to each joint by the ends of the beams framing into the joint equals zero. As a
sign convention we assume that all unknown moments are positive and act clockwise
on the ends of members.
Since the moments applied to the ends of members represent the action of the joint on
the member, equal and oppositely directed moments must act on the joints (see Fig.
2.1b). The three joint equilibrium. Equations are .
At joint A: MAB = 0
At joint B : MBA + MBC = 0

(2.2)

At joint c: MCB = 0

24

JointA

JointB

JointC

Fig 2.2a and Fig 2.2b

EULERS THEORY OF BENDING MOMENT

EulerBernoulli beam theory (also known as engineer's beam theory or classical beam
theory) is a simplification of the linear theory of elasticity which provides a means of
calculating the load-carrying and deflection characteristics of beams. It covers the
case for small deflections of a beam that is subjected to lateral loads only. It is thus a
special case of Timoshenko beam theory. It was first enunciated circa 1750, but was
not applied on a large scale until the development of the Eiffel Tower and the Ferris
wheel in the late 19th century. Following these successful demonstrations, it quickly
became a cornerstone of engineering and an enabler of the Second Industrial
Revolution.
Additional analysis tools have been developed such as plate theory and finite element
analysis, but the simplicity of beam theory makes it an important tool in the sciences,
especially structural and mechanical engineering.
Schematic of cross-section of a bent beam showing the neutral axis

25

Fig 2.3

HISTORY
Prevailing consensus is that Galileo Galilei made the first attempts at developing a
theory of beams, but recent studies argue that Leonardo da Vinci was the first to make
the crucial observations. Da Vinci lacked Hooke's law and calculus to complete the
theory, whereas Galileo was held back by an incorrect assumption he made.
The Bernoulli beam is named after Jacob Bernoulli, who made the significant
discoveries. Leonhard Euler and Daniel Bernoulli were the first to put together a
useful theory circa 1750. At the time, science and engineering were generally seen as
very distinct fields, and there was considerable doubt that a mathematical product of
academia could be trusted for practical safety applications. Bridges and buildings
continued to be designed by precedent until the late 19th century, when the Eiffel
Tower and Ferris wheel demonstrated the validity of the theory on large scales.
BENDING MOMENT EQUATION M/I = /y = E/R.

26

With

reference

to

the

figure

given

to

us,

consider

any

two

normal

sections AB and CD of a beam at small distance L apart (that is, AC = BD = L).

Let AB and CD intersect neutral layer at the points M and Nrespectively.
Let;
M = bending moment acting on beam
= Angle subtended at centre by the arc.
R = Radius of curvature of neutral layer M' N' .
At any distance 'y' from neutral layer MN, consider layer EF.
As shown in the figure the beam because of sagging bending moment. After
bending, A' B', C' D' , M' N' and
E'F' represent final positions of AB, CD, MN and EF in that order.
When produced, A' B' and C' D' intersect each other at the O subtending an angle
radian at point O, which is centre of curvature.
As L is quite small, arcs A' C' , M' N' , E' F' and B' D' can be taken as circular.
Now, strain in layer EF because of bending can be given by
e = (E F - EF)/EF = (E F - MN)/MN
As MN is the neutral layer, MN = M' N'

Let = stress set up in layer EF because of bending

E=Young's modulus of material of beam.

Equate the equation (i) and (ii);

27

Let

= stress set up in layer EF because of bending

E = Young's modulus of material of beam.

Fig 2.4
At distance 'y', let us consider an elementary strip of quite small thickness dy. We
have already assumed that ' ' is bending stress in this strip.
Let dA = area of the elementary strip. Then, force developed in this strip = .dA.
Then the, elementary moment of resistance because of this elementary force can be
given by dM = f.dA.y
Total moment of resistance because of all such elementary forces can be given by

From the Equation (iii),

By putting this value of f in Equation (iv), we get

28

But

where I = Moment of inertia of whole area about neutral axis N-A.

Where;
M = Bending moment
I = Moment of Inertia about axis of bending that is; IXX
y = Distance of the layer at which the bending stress is consider
(We take always the maximum value of y, that is, distance of extreme fiber from
N.A.)
E = Modulus of elasticity of beam material.
R = Radius of curvature

CHAPTER 3
METHODOLOGY
The objective is to analyze the statically indeterminate beams and frames. Literature
review has been done. Various sources of literature, academic textbooks, research
papers from journals, and articles have been reviewed. Several types of beams have
been studied.

29

Package, namely MSC Marc Mentat has been used to model the indeterminate beam
and frame which are analysed to calculate the slope and deflection of the forces in
each member of the structure and also calculate the stress-variations at each element
for each position of loading. The stress is calculated at several points along the depth
and the theoretical stresses match with the stress values obtained from MSC Marc
Package

CHAPTER-4
STRUCTURAL ANALYSIS PACKAGE
MARC SOFTWARE(Package)

30

Currently, there are quite a number of structural analysis and design software
applications present in the market. Although they are rather expensive, their use has
become prevalent amongst a majority of structural engineers and engineering firms.
A majority of these applications are based on the Finite-Element method of analysis.
This method facilitates computations in a wide range of physical problems including
heat transfer, seepage, flow of fluids, and electrical & magnetic potential.
In the finite-element method, a continuum is idealized as an assemblage of finite
elements with specified nodes. In essence, the analysis of a structure by the finiteelement method is an application of the displacement/stiffness method.
The use of a computer in the finite-element approach is essential because of the large
number of degrees of freedom commonly involved. The computerized computations
make use of the systematic sequences executed in a computer program as well as the
high processing speeds.
There are many structural and design softwares to analyze a structure and one such
software used in this project is MARC.
Marc is a powerful, general-purpose, nonlinear finite element analysis solution to
accurately simulate behavior of a structure under static and dynamic loading
scenarios. Marc's versatility in modeling nonlinear material behaviors makes it ideal
to solve your complex design problems(www.mscsoftware.com)

Procedure
In this section, it will be demonstrated how to set up the basic requirements for a
linear elastic beam analysis. For this purpose, a simply supported beam of certain
span is subjected a point load at its mid-span will be analyzed. The goal of the
analysis is to demonstrate
31

How to apply boundary conditions

How to set material properties

How to set geometric properties

Selecting quantities to be calculated in the analysis for subsequent

postprocessing

How to submit a job using the Marc finite element program

How to generate model plot results

Overview of Steps
Step 1 Mesh generation
Step 2 Boundary conditions
Step 3 Material behavior
Step 4 Geometric properties
Step 5 Postprocessing
With the help of each screenshot taken while analyzing the given problem, we define
the above steps in detail to obtain the plot results.

32

STEP 1 Establish an input grid. Add the elements onto the grid with respect to the
considered

span

STEP 2 After the selection of elements, proceed to Geometric properties tab where
we assign the cross section of the beam considering the element types (untick the

33

Transverse

shear)

and

material

behavior

34

as

linear

elastic

only.

STEP 3-The material behavior is identical for all elements. Elastic behavior with
youngs modulus and Poissons ratio must be specified for this material.

35

STEP 4 Applying boundary conditions for the given beam considering the type of
loads and type of supports acting on the structure.

STEP 5 For a point load condition, the given properties (in fig.) are to be considered

36

37

STEP 6 Conditions for a fixed support

STEP 7 Conditions for a roller support where displacement X, Y & Z are 0.

38

39

STEP 8 In the Load cases tab, click on the static type of load case

40

STEP 9 We perform Structural type of analysis.

STEP 10 After the selection of structural type, we proceed to its properties and Job
results. Choose 2-D Analysis and select the Stress type of element tensors in the job
results.

41

STEP 11 Proceed to Run the job and choose Submit (1)

STEP 12 Once the job is complete we are able to do post processing. They are
performed on the Marc post file .In the scalar type of modal plot results , we find the
reaction force Y which is along the y-axis.
42

STEP 13 Finding out reaction moment along Z-direction.

The results show that the beam has been analyzed through the package with the set of
conditions performed.
Using this package, we also analyzed Indeterminate beams and frames which follows
the same procedure.
The obtained results are then compared with the theoretical calculations.
43

CHAPTER-5
ANALYSIS OF INDETERMINATE BEAMS AND
FRAMES

5.1 Problems
1.Consider a beam with supports as show in the below figure.

Fig 5.1

In the given load case,

44

We calculate the loads based on the slope-deflection method and analyze the given
problem through the package.
Using the MARC software, we can find a solution with the given set of parameters.

Package results : Reaction force in Y-direction

The summation of the Y-Reactions = 1.555556 + 7.43424+8.02041+7.43424+1.55556

= 26.00 tons

45

The total applied load in Y- direction = 26 tons

46

5.2 Problem
A portal frame loaded as shown in figure is analyzed for member end forces by
slope-deflection method.

Fig 5.2
DOF = 4 (A, B, C, )
Rotations are taken positive clockwise at the joints and lateral displacement at the
beam level is taken positive to left.
Since A is a hinge : MAB = 0
Since D is clamp D = 0

47

48

49

50

51

52

Package results: Reactions in Y-direction

Total Reactions = 24.6236 + 15.3764 = 40 KN
Total Load = 40 KN

53

Reactions in X-direction
Total Reactions = 17.995 + 42.005 = 60 KN
Total Horizontal Load = 60 KN

54

Package results: Deflected shape- SWAY

55

5.3 Problem
Analyze the given continuous beam and solve for the reactions

Fig 5.3
The results obtained after analysis
Vertical reactions at each support calculated from the package
12521.7
21913
23978.3
The summation of all the vertical reactions =63999.96 kip

5586.96

The total load acting on the continuous beam vertically downwards =64000 kip

56

Package results:
Rotation along Z-direction

Package results
Reaction Force along Y-direction

57

5.4 Problem Based on Eulers theory of Bending moment

Stress calculation using Eulers theory
Consider a cantilever beam of span 8m and a point load acting on end of the span as shown in the
figure 5.4

Fig 5.4
Manual Calculations
M=2*10e3 * 4 * 10e3
=8 * 10e6 N-mm
F=M * y / I
= 8 * 10e6 * 250

= 0.096

250 * 1000e3
12
f = 8 * 10e6 *500

0.192

250 * 1000e3
12

58

Package results:
Displacement in Y-direction

59

Variation of stress values across the beam

Comparision of results
y (mm)
500
375
250
125
0
-125
-250
-375
-500

stress(package)
0.190483
0.142884
0.095255
0.0476279
0
-0.0476279
-0.095255
-0.142884
-0.190483
Fig 5.1

stress(theoretical)
0.192
0.144
0.096
0.048
0
-0.048
-0.096
-0.144
-0.192

Variation of stress distribution through graph:

60

0.25
0.2
0.15
0.1
0.05
Stress (in MPa)

-600

-400
stress(package)

0
0
-0.05

-200

200
stress(theoretical)

400

-0.1
-0.15
-0.2
-0.25
Depth Y (in mm)

The stress is calculated at several points along the depth and the theoretical stresses match with
the stress values obtained from MSC Marc Package

CHAPTER-6
CONCLUSION

The analysis of structures involves the use of three fundamental relationships: equilibrium
equations, compatibility conditions, and member force-deformation relations. In the analysis of
indeterminate structures, the equilibrium equations must be supplemented by the compatibility
conditions based on the geometry of the deformation of the structure. The link between the
equilibrium equations and the compatibility conditions is established by means of the memberforce deformation relations of the structure.
Using the Marc package, we analysed few static indeterminate structures and conclude that the
results obtained are quite similar to the theoretical values.

61

600

We also conclude that time taken to analyse through the package is very less when compared to
manual calculations.

62

REFERENCES
[1]

Anand A. S., Theory of Structures (Indeterminate structural analysis), Satya

prakashan, 1989
[2]

Vazirani V. N. and Ratwani M. M., Concrete structures, Khanna publishers Delhi,

1985
[3]

Prasad V. S., Structural Analysis, Galgotia publications private Ltd., New delhi, 2000

[4]

Hibbeler R. C., Structural Analysis sixth edition, Pearson Education, 2008

[5]

Mohan Kalani. Analysis of continuous beams and frames with bars of variable
crosssection:2. Indian Concrete Journal, November 1971.

[6]

Mohan Kalani. Analysis of continuous beams and frames with bars of variable
crosssection I. Indian Concrete Journal, March 1971.

[7]

West H.H. Analysis of Structures. John Wiley & Sons, New York, USA.

63