1119

NOTE / NOTE

On the static analysis of constrained structural

systems
Hee-Chang Eun, Eun-Taik Lee, and Heon-Soo Chung

Abstract: Complete structures might contain so many degrees of freedom that it would be infeasible to perform a
structural analysis. The derivation of the equilibrium equations of an entire structure to utilize kinematical compatibility
conditions at the interfaces of the substructures requires complicated intermediate processes or numerical schemes for
determining multipliers. This study derives an explicit matrix form of the equilibrium equations of structural systems
subjected to constraints like compatibility conditions or linear displacement relations. The equation is obtained by mini-
mizing a quadratic form of the variation in unconstrained and constrained displacements with respect to all constrained
displacements that satisfy the constraints. And the physical meaning of the constraint forces required to satisfy the con-
straints is investigated. The validity of the proposed method is illustrated by several applications.

Key words: constraints, compatibility, equilibrium equation, generalized inverse.

Résumé : Les structures entières peuvent contenir tant de degrés de liberté qu’il serait impossible d’effectuer un calcul
des structures. La fonction dérivée des équations d’équilibre d’une structure entière afin d’utiliser les conditions de
compatibilité cinématique aux interfaces des sous-structures exige un procédé intermédiaire complexe ou des approches
numériques pour déterminer les multiplicateurs. La présente étude dérive une forme matricielle explicite d’équations
d’équilibre de systèmes structuraux soumis à des contraintes, telles que les conditions de compatibilité ou les relations
de déplacement linéaire. L’équation est obtenue en minimisant une forme quadratique de la variation dans les déplace-
ments sans contraintes et sous contraintes en tenant compte de tous les déplacements sous contraintes qui satisfont aux
contraintes. La signification physique des forces de contrainte requises pour satisfaire les contraintes est également
étudiée. La validité de la méthode proposée est illustrée par diverses applications.

Mots clés : contraintes, compatibilité, équation d’équilibre, inverse généralisé.

[Traduit par la Rédaction] Eun 1122

1. Introduction plete system. Combining the equilibrium equation of each

Finite element models are utilized to obtain solutions for
the displacements of structures subjected to static loads.
Complete structures are very complex, and the finite element
model of the entire structure might contain so many degrees
of freedom that it would be infeasible to perform a structural
analysis based on the finite element equations for the com-
Received 22 October 2003. Revision accepted 21 April 2004.
Published on the NRC Research Press Web site at
http://cjce.nrc.ca on 2 November 2004.
H.-C. Eun.1,2 Department of Architectural Engineering, Cheju
National University, Jeju, Korea.
E.-T. Lee, and H.-S. Chung. Department of Architectural
Engineering, Chung-Ang University, Seoul, Korea.
Written discussion of this note is welcomed and will be
received by the Editor until 30 April 2005.
1
Corresponding author (e-mail: heechang@kangwon.ac.kr).
2
Present address: Department of Architectural Engineering,
Kangwon National Univeristy, Chuncheon, Korea.
substructure and the kinematical compatibility conditions at
the interfaces of substructures, a finite element model of the
entire structure is assembled.
To utilize kinematical compatibility conditions at the in-
terfaces of substructures, the equilibrium equations of an
entire structure are obtained by complicated intermediate-
processes or numerical schemes for determining multipliers.
There are many methods for developing an approximate
mathematical model for the structural analysis by decompos-
ing into components and assembling them. Most of the
methods for structural analysis by substructuring and assem-
bling an entire structure depend on numerical approaches
like the Lagrange-multiplier method (Felippa et al. 1998;
Park 2000; Park et al. 1997). These studies propose a gen-
eral method to include the rigid-body modes of the free–free
finite element. Hangai and Wu (1999) determined the stable
state of a hybrid structure composed of cables and rigid
structures by neglecting the velocity and acceleration vectors
of the kinematic coordinates. Udwadia and Kalaba (1992)
presented the explicit equations of motion for constrained
dynamic systems by minimizing the Gaussian function with

Can. J. Civ. Eng. 31: 1119–1122 (2004) doi: 10.1139/L04-036 © 2004 NRC Canada
1120
respect to all constrained accelerations that satisfy the con-
straints.
The aim of this study is to derive an explicit matrix form
of the static equilibrium equations for constrained structural
systems. This is obtained by minimizing a quadratic form of
the differences in unconstrained and constrained displace-
ments with respect to all constrained displacements that sat-
isfy the constraints. And the physical meaning of the
constraint forces provided by nature to satisfy constraints is
investigated. The validity of the proposed method is illus-
trated in several applications.
2. Formulation
Let us consider a structure of n degrees of freedom with
the total potential energy expressed as
1 T
[1] Π= u K u − uT F
2
in which Π denotes the potential energy of the structure, u
and F are the n × 1 generalized displacement and nodal
force vectors, and K is the n × n positive definite stiffness
matrix.
We assume that the structure is subjected to m linear con-
straints written in matrix form
[2] Au = b
where A is a real matrix of m × n and b is an n × 1 vector.
The total potential energy of the structure due to the con-
straints [2] changes as
1 T
[3] Π= u K u − uT( F + F c )
2
where Fc is an n × 1 constraint force vector required to sat-
isfy the constraint set [2].
The constraint forces are often determined by the
Lagrange-multiplier method based on numerical schemes.
However, this study determines the forces without depending
on the multipliers. The variation in the potential energies [1]
and [3] was assumedto be a quadratic form
[4] ∆Π =
1
(u − u$) TK(u − u$)
2 There are infinite numbers of constraint forces provided
where u$ and u denote the unconstrained and constrained dis-
placement vectors to be determined by eqs. [1] and [3], re-
spectively.
The minimization of eq. [4] can be interpreted as mini-
mizing the variation in the unconstrained and constrained
displacement vectors. Accordingly, the minimizing process
implies that the constrained displacements are turned into
the equilibrium state by the action of additional forces. The
additional forces are constraint forces and are interpreted as
the forces provided by nature for equilibrating. Thus, by pre-
dicting the constraint forces required for keeping the given
deformation state, all structural and mechanical systems can
be properly designed and analyzed. To minimize eq. [4] with
respect to the constrained displacement vector u, eq. [2] is
modified as
[5] (AK–1/2)K1/2u = b
Can. J. Civ. Eng. Vol. 31, 2004
Solving eq. [5] with respect to K1/2u, according to the theory
of generalized inverse (Graybill 1983), it follows that
[6] K1/2u = (AK–1/2)+b + [I – (AK–1/2)+(AK–1/2)]y
where “+” denotes the generalized inverse matrix, I is an
identity matrix, and y is an arbitrary vector. From eq. [6], it
can be observed that displacements to satisfy the constraint
eq. [2] exist infinitely.
Substituting eq. [6] into eq. [4] and minimizing the result
with respect to all displacements u, the result can be derived as
[7] K1/2u – K1/2u$ = (AK–1/2)+b
+ [I – (AK–1/2)+(AK–1/2)]y – K1/2u$ = 0
Letting Q = [I – (AK–1/2)+ (AK–1/2)] and solving eq. [7] with
respect to y, it follows that
[8] y = Q+[K1/2u$ – (AK–1/2)+b] + [I – Q+Q]z
where z is also another arbitrary vector.
Using the fundamental properties of the generalized inverse
matrix, (AK–1/2)+(AK–1/2)(AK–1/2)+ = (AK–1/2)+ and Q+Q = Q,
eq. [8] can be arranged as
[9] y = [K1/2 – (AK–1/2)+ A]u$ + [I – Q]z
Substituting eq. [9] into eq. [6] and premultiplying K–1/2 on
both sides of the result, the generalized displacement vector
to satisfy the constraints [2] is derived as
[10] u = u$ + K–1/2(AK–1/2)+(b – Au)
$
Premultiplying K on both sides of eq. [10], we obtain the
equilibrium equation for constrained systems written as
[11] $
Ku = Ku$ + K1/2(AK–1/2)+(b – Au)
The second term of right-hand side of eq. [11] denotes the
constraint force vector that is required to satisfy the con-
straints. It can be seen that the actual static displacements
and constraint forces are explicitly calculated by eqs. [10]
and [11], respectively, without any numerical approaches.
3. Physical meaning of constraint forces
by nature for satisfying the constraints as shown by eq. [6].
However, the actual constraint force to keep the equilibrium
condition is one of them and is expressed as the second term
of the right-hand side of eq. [11]. The physical meaning of
the selected constraint forces was investigated.
The constraint force vector can be written as
[12] Fc = K u – F
where F = K u$.
Substituting eq. [12] in eq. [4], eq. [4] can be written as
1 c T −1 c
[13] ∆Π = F K F
2
From eq. [13], it can be seen that the variation in the total
potential energy can be expressed as a quadratic form of a
constraint force vector.
© 2004 NRC Canada
Eun
Fig. 1. Graphical interpretation of constrained equilibrium equa-
tion: (a) graphical representation of equilibrium equation, and
(b) graphical representation of constraint forces.
Premultiplying both sides of eq. [6] by K1/2, and then sub-
stituting the result into eq. [12] gives
[14] Fc = Ku − K u$
= K1 / 2(AK −1/ 2) + b
+ K1 / 2[I − (AK −1/ 2) + (AK −1 / 2)] y − K u$
Minimizing eq. [13] with respect to the constraint force vec-
tor Fc, with the help of eq. [14], it follows that
[15] K1 / 2(AK −1/ 2) + b
+ K1 / 2[I − (AK −1/ 2) + (AK −1 / 2)] y − K u$ = 0
Defining Q = [I – (AK–1/2)+(AK–1/2)] and Q+Q = Q, the ar-
bitrary vector y is derived as
[16] y = K u$ − (AK −1 / 2) + AK −1 / 2u$ + (AK −1 / 2) + (AK −1 / 2) z
where z is another arbitrary vector.
Substituting eq. [16] into eq. [14] and arranging the result,
the constraint force vector can be defined as
−1 / 2 +
[17] F =K
c 1/2
(AK ) (b − A u$)
From the above derivation, the constraint forces can be rec-
ognized as the minimum forces of all of the forces provided
by nature to satisfy the constraints. Consequently, it can be
interpreted that nature chooses the minimum value of all
constraint forces to satisfy the given constraints.
Figure 1 graphically represents the equilibrium relation of
unconstrained and constrained systems from eq. [11]. In
1121
Fig. 2. A model composed of a truss and two springs: (a) entire
system, and (b) partitioned substructures.
Fig. 1a, K* = [K – K1/2(AK–1/2)+ A] and c = K1/2(AK–1/2)+b.
Figure 1a indicates that the presence of constraints leads to a
change in the equilibrium state as well as a change in the
stiffness. Figure 1b shows that the constraint force vector is
expressed as the product of the variation in constrained
and unconstrained displacements, and the weighting matrix
K = K1/ 2(AK −1/ 2) + A
4. Applications
Consider the equilibrium of a truss model as shown in
Fig. 2a, where two linear springs are assumed to be attached
at nodes 2 and 3. The system properties are indicated in
Fig. 2a. Denoting the properties associated with the truss
and springs by the subscripts “t” and “s”, respectively, the
equilibrium equations of each structure are written as
[18a] Ktut = Ft
[18b] Ksus = Fs
where
ut = [u1 u2 v 2 u3 u3 u4 v 4 ]T
us = [u2′ u3′ ] T
K s = diag[ka kb ]
Ft = [0 0 0 F 0 0 0]T
© 2004 NRC Canada
1122
and
Fs = [0 0] T
The entire system requires the following compatibility
conditions at the interfaces between the substructures:
[19] u2 = u2′, u3 = u3′
and assumes that the deformations at nodes 2 and 3 are con-
strained by a linear relation
[20] 2u2 = u3 + 0.5 cm
ut = [0 0.2259 0.215 − 0.0483 − 0.0292 0.1751 0.0507]T cm
[22]
us = [0.2259 − 0.0483]T cm
It is observed that the numerical values of the displacements
satisfy the compatibility conditions [19] and the constraint
[20]. The constraint forces required to satisfy the constraints
are calculated to be
F tc = [0 1.23 0 − 0.81 0 0 0]T kN
[23]
F cs = [0 0.791 − 0.203]T kN
From this application, it is expected that the proposed equa-
tion can be easily and explicitly applied to the design and
analysis of trusses or other structures.
5. Conclusions
This study considered a structural analysis of static struc-
tures subjected to linear sets of constraints. An explicit equi-
librium equation for constrained structural systems was
developed by minimizing the quadratic form of the variation
in the constrained and unconstrained displacements. The
newly developed equation can be easily and explicitly ap-
plied to the structural analysis of constrained structures. It
was also explained that the constraint forces are the mini-
mum values of all forces that satisfy the constraints, and the
physical meaning of the constraint forces was investigated
Can. J. Civ. Eng. Vol. 31, 2004
For a numerical result, the values of the system properties
were taken as
E = 20000 N/cm2, A = 200 cm2
[21] L = 400 cm, F = 300 N
ka = 3500 N/cm, kb = 4200 N/cm
Substituting the equilibrium eqs. [18a] and [18b], and the
constraint eqs. [19] and [20] into the equilibrium eq. [10],
the results are found to be
and was graphically evaluated. Through several applications,
the validity of the proposed equation was established and it
was observed that the equation could be easily and explicitly
applied to the design and analysis of discrete as well as con-
tinuous systems.
References
Felippa, C.A., Park, K.C., and Filho, R.J. 1998. The construction
of free-free flexibility matrices as generalized stiffness inverses.
Computers and Structures, 68: 411–418.
Graybill, F. 1983. Matrices and applications to statistics.
Wadsworth Belmont California, Belmont, Calif.
Hangai, Y., and Wu, M. 1999. Analytical method of structural be-
haviours of a hybrid structure consisting of cables and rigid
structures. Engineering Structures, 21: 726–736.
Park, K.C. 2000. Partitioned solution of reduced-integrated finite
element equations. Computers and Structures, 74: 281–292.
Park, K.C., Justino, Jr. M.R., and Felippa, C.A. 1997. An algebra-
ically partitioned FETI method for parallel structural analysis:
algorithm description. International Journal of Numerical
Methods in Engineering, 40: 2717–2737.
Udwadia, F.E., and Kalaba, R.E. 1992. A new perspective on con-
strained motion. Proceedings of the Royal Society of London,
439: 407–410.
© 2004 NRC Canada