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
The discussion revolves around issues with incorrect bending moment signs in a seven-storey structure analyzed using the Direct Stiffness Method. The user reports accurate force magnitudes but incorrect signs, specifically noting a positive bending moment at the bottom and a negative at the top of each column storey. They suspect the transformation matrix might be the source of the issue and seek validation on its correctness. A suggestion is made to test the code with a simpler structure to troubleshoot the problem. The thread concludes with acknowledgment that a similar query has been resolved on another site.
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: 81
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
 
What mathematics software should engineering students use? Is it correct that much of the engineering industry relies on MATLAB, making it the tool many graduates will encounter in professional settings? How does SageMath compare? It is a free package that supports both numerical and symbolic computation and can be installed on various platforms. Could it become more widely used because it is freely available? I am an academic who has taught engineering mathematics, and taught the...

Similar threads

  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
3K
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
645
Replies
11
Views
2K