Structural Engineering Analysi

_________________________________________________________
Structural Engineering
Analysis and Design
_________________________________________________________
SECOND EDITION
ENGR SREEJIT RAGHU

MEng DIC ACGI MIStructE CEng MIEM
Ove Arup & Partners International Ltd

13 Fitzroy Street, London W1T 4BQ
tel +44 (0) 20 7636 1531

fax +44 (0) 20 7755 2150
email sreejit_raghu@yahoo.co.uk
internet www.arup.com
Structural Engineering Analysis and Design
Second Edition
TABLE OF CONTENTS
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS .....................................................................................................................................13
LIST OF SYMBOLS AND NOTATIONS .............................................................................................................14
1 INTRODUCTION..............................................................................................................................................17
2 CONCEPTS OF COMPUTATIONAL FINITE ELEMENT STRUCTURAL ANALYSIS.......................18
2.1 OVERVIEW OF THE FINITE ELEMENT METHOD ............................................................................................18

2.1.1 GL, ML Static Finite Element Elemental Formulation ...............................................................................................................18
2.1.1.1 The Principle of Virtual Displacements of The Principle of Virtual Work (Equivalent to the Variational Method or The Principle of Minimum
Potential Energy) ..................................................................................................................................................................................................................... 18
2.1.1.2 The Method of Weighted Residuals........................................................................................................................................................................ 20
2.1.2 GL, ML Static Finite Element Global Formulation.....................................................................................................................21
2.1.3 GNL, MNL Static Finite Element Elemental Formulation .........................................................................................................24
2.1.4 GNL, MNL Static Finite Element Global Formulation ...............................................................................................................29
2.1.5 How Nonlinear Analysis Varies From Linear Analysis ...............................................................................................................32
2.1.5.1 Geometric Nonlinearity .......................................................................................................................................................................................... 32
2.1.5.2 Material Nonlinearity.............................................................................................................................................................................................. 34
2.1.5.3 Contact and Boundary Conditions Nonlinearity...................................................................................................................................................... 34
2.1.6 GL, ML and GNL, MNL Dynamic Finite Element Elemental and Global Formulation..........................................................34
2.2 STATIC ANALYSIS CONCEPTS .........................................................................................................................35
2.2.1 Overview of Methods of Structural Static Analyses ....................................................................................................................35
2.3 DYNAMIC ANALYSIS CONCEPTS .....................................................................................................................36
2.3.1 Overview of Methods of Structural Dynamic Analyses ...............................................................................................................36
2.3.1.1 Modal Analyses ...................................................................................................................................................................................................... 36
2.3.1.2 Forced Response Analyses...................................................................................................................................................................................... 36
2.3.2 Nature of Trial Solution in Harmonic Frequency Vibrations .....................................................................................................38
2.4 STATIC AND DYNAMIC ANALYSES SEQUENCES .............................................................................................39
3 METHODS OF STATIC ANALYSES.............................................................................................................42
3.1 GL, ML STATIC ANALYSIS BY THE IMPLICIT DIRECT STIFFNESS METHOD ..............................................42
3.1.1 Mathematical Formulation of Analysis.........................................................................................................................................42
3.1.2 ∆ (KGA From KEA) Analysis ...........................................................................................43
Concepts of Geometric Stiffness or P-∆
3.1.3 ∆ (KG From KE ) Linear Static Analysis – Direct Approach............................................................................48
Performing P-∆ A A
3.1.4 ∆ (KGA From KEA) Linear Static Analysis – Modal Approach; And Hence P-∆
Performing P-∆ ∆ Based Buckling ...................50
3.1.4.1 Objectives ............................................................................................................................................................................................................... 50
3.1.4.2 Mathematical Formulation...................................................................................................................................................................................... 50
3.1.4.3 Critical Load Case Considerations.......................................................................................................................................................................... 52
3.1.4.4 Modelling (Modal) Imperfections........................................................................................................................................................................... 53
3.1.4.5 Design..................................................................................................................................................................................................................... 57
3.1.4.6 Limitations.............................................................................................................................................................................................................. 58
3.1.4.7 Methodology........................................................................................................................................................................................................... 59
3.1.5 MSC.NASTRAN Decks ..................................................................................................................................................................62
3.1.5.1 ML, GL Static Analysis .......................................................................................................................................................................................... 62
3.1.5.2 GL, ML P-∆ (KGA From KEA) Static Analysis......................................................................................................................................................... 71
3.1.5.3 GL, ML P-∆ (KGA From Exact or Approximate KTA) Static Analysis ..................................................................................................................... 72
3.1.6 Hand Methods Verification............................................................................................................................................................73
3.1.6.1 Static Displacements by the Unit Load Method of the Virtual Work Principle....................................................................................................... 73
3.1.6.2 BMD and SFD of Structures of Low Static Indeterminacies by Flexibility Analysis.............................................................................................. 76
3.1.6.3 Bending Moments, Shear Force, and Displacements of Structural Elements by the Stiffness Method ................................................................... 98
3.1.6.4 Bending Moments and Shear Force of Structures of Low Kinematic Indeterminacies by Moment Distribution .................................................... 99
3.1.6.5 Summary of Deflections and Effects..................................................................................................................................................................... 123
3.1.6.6 Member Buckling Check Using The P-∆ Method To Incorporate Imperfections, Residual Stresses .................................................................... 164
3.1.6.7 Overall Portal Frame and Multi-Storey Building P-∆ Analysis Using The Amplified Sway Method ................................................................... 177
3.2 GL, ML BUCKLING ANALYSIS BY THE IMPLICIT LINEARIZED EIGENVALUE ANALYSIS .........................178
3.2.1 Linearization of Tangent Stiffness Matrix and Formulating The Linear Eigenvalue Problem .............................................178
2
Second Edition
3.2.2 Problem Reduction and Trial Modes in Linear Buckling Analysis ..........................................................................................184
3.2.3 Concepts of Linearized (KGA From KEA) Buckling Analysis.....................................................................................................185
3.2.4 MSC.NASTRAN Decks ................................................................................................................................................................186
3.2.4.1 GL, ML (KGA From KEA) Buckling Analysis ........................................................................................................................................................ 186
3.2.4.2 GL, ML (KGA From Exact or Approximate KTA) Buckling Analysis .................................................................................................................... 192
3.2.5 Hand Methods Verification..........................................................................................................................................................195
3.2.5.1 Member or Local (KGA From KEA) Buckling ........................................................................................................................................................ 195
3.2.5.2 Overall System (KGA From KEA) Buckling............................................................................................................................................................ 203
3.3 GL, MNL PLASTIC COLLAPSE ANALYSIS BY THE IMPLICIT LINEAR SIMPLEX PROGRAMMING ............214
3.3.1 Mathematical Formulation of Analysis.......................................................................................................................................214
3.3.2 Mathematical Proof ......................................................................................................................................................................217
3.3.3 Displacements and Rotations at Collapse ...................................................................................................................................221
3.3.4 Plastic Limit Analysis of Simple Framed Structures .................................................................................................................222
3.3.4.1 Portal Frame ......................................................................................................................................................................................................... 222
3.3.4.2 Parabolic Arch ...................................................................................................................................................................................................... 228
3.3.4.3 Displacements and Rotations at Collapse.............................................................................................................................................................. 229
3.3.5 Plastic Limit Analysis of Rectangular Multi-Storey Multi-Bay Frames with Improved Data Generation ...........................231
3.3.5.1 Two Storey Frame With Concentrated Loading.................................................................................................................................................... 232
3.3.5.2 Three Storey Frame With Distributed Load .......................................................................................................................................................... 234
3.3.5.3 Multi-Bay Portal Frame ........................................................................................................................................................................................ 237
3.3.5.4 Vierendeel Truss ................................................................................................................................................................................................... 239
3.3.6.1 Plastic Collapse Analysis by Solving Equilibrium Equations ............................................................................................................................... 240
3.3.6.2 Plastic Collapse Analysis by Virtual Work (Hobbs) ............................................................................................................................................. 244
3.3.6.3 Plastic Collapse Analysis by Virtual Work (Chryssanthopoulos) ......................................................................................................................... 246
3.4 GNL, MNL, CONTACT NONLINEAR STATIC AND BUCKLING ANALYSIS BY THE IMPLICIT TRACING THE
EQUILIBRIUM PATH METHOD ................................................................................................................................262
3.4.1 Mathematical Formulation of Tracing the Equilibrium Path...................................................................................................262
3.4.2 Newton-Raphson Load Control, Displacement Control or Arc-Length Control Algorithm..................................................265
3.4.3 Equilibrium Paths, Stability of Equilibrium Paths, Critical Points, Stability of Critical Points............................................266
3.4.4.1 GNL, MNL Load Control, Displacement Control or Arc-Length Control Static Analysis.................................................................................... 269
3.4.4.2 Nonlinear Static and Linearized Eigenvalue Buckling Analysis ........................................................................................................................... 280
3.4.4.3 Nonlinear Static and Linear Eigenvalue Modal Dynamic Analysis ...................................................................................................................... 281
3.4.4.4 Restart From Nonlinear Static Analysis SOL 106 Into Nonlinear Static Analysis SOL 106................................................................................. 282
3.4.4.5 Restart From Nonlinear Static SOL 106 Into Linear Solution Schemes SOL 107 to SOL 112 ............................................................................. 282
3.4.4.6 Implicit Nonlinear Static (and Dynamic Analysis) SOL 400 ................................................................................................................................ 282
3.4.4.7 Implicit Nonlinear Static (and Dynamic Analysis) SOL 600 ................................................................................................................................ 282
3.5 GNL, MNL STATIC AND BUCKLING ANALYSIS BY DYNAMIC RELAXATION.............................................283
3.5.1 Dynamic Relaxation of the Explicit Finite Difference Scheme Solving Newton’s Dynamic Equilibrium ODE (LS-DYNA)
283
3.5.2 LS-DYNA (GNL, MNL Explicit Transient) Dynamic Relaxation Cards.................................................................................286
4 METHODS OF DYNAMIC ANALYSES......................................................................................................288
4.1 GL, ML IMPLICIT REAL MODAL (EIGENVALUE) ANALYSIS ......................................................................288

4.1.2.1 GL, ML Real Modal Analysis............................................................................................................................................................................... 292
4.1.2.2 GL, ML P-∆ (KGA From KEA) Real Modal Analysis ............................................................................................................................................. 293
4.1.2.3 GL, ML P-∆ (KGA From Exact or Approximate KTA) Real Modal Analysis ......................................................................................................... 295
4.1.3.1 Natural Frequency and Free Vibration Response of SDOF Systems..................................................................................................................... 296
4.1.3.2 Natural Frequencies of MDOF Systems................................................................................................................................................................ 299
4.1.3.3 Natural Frequencies of Distributed Systems ......................................................................................................................................................... 311
4.1.3.4 Natural Frequencies By Exactly Solving the Partial Differential Equilibrium Equation ....................................................................................... 312
4.1.3.5 Approximate Formulae ......................................................................................................................................................................................... 317
4.2 GL, ML IMPLICIT DIRECT COMPLEX MODAL (EIGENVALUE) ANALYSIS ................................................319
4.2.2 Complexity of Modes of Vibration ..............................................................................................................................................320
4.2.3 Complex Modal Analysis To Determine Modal Damping Values ............................................................................................320
4.2.4.1 GL, ML Complex Modal Analysis ....................................................................................................................................................................... 321
4.2.4.2 GL, ML P-∆ (KGA From KEA) Complex Modal Analysis ...................................................................................................................................... 323
4.2.4.3 GL, ML P-∆ (KGA From Exact or Approximate KTA) Complex Modal Analysis .................................................................................................. 325
3
Second Edition
4.2.5.1 Determination of Damped Natural Frequency and the Maximum Dynamic Displacement, umax for Free Damped Vibration Due to Initial
Displacement and/or Initial Velocity by Classically Solving the SDOF Linear ODE and Maximizing the Solution ............................................................. 326
4.3 GL, ML IMPLICIT (REAL) MODAL FREQUENCY RESPONSE ANALYSIS .....................................................329
4.3.1 Nature of the Dynamic Loading Function ..................................................................................................................................329
4.3.3 Capability of A Finite Number of Modes To Model The Static and Dynamic Response of Structure...................................334
4.3.4 Complex Response F(ω ω) and Amplification D(ω ω) With Elemental and/or Modal Structural Damping................................337
4.3.5 Representation of A MDOF System As A SDOF system ...........................................................................................................338
4.3.6.1 GL, ML Modal Forced Frequency Response Analysis ......................................................................................................................................... 340
4.3.6.2 GL, ML P-∆ (KGA From KEA) Modal Forced Frequency Response Analysis ........................................................................................................ 343
4.3.6.3 GL, ML P-∆ (KGA From Exact or Approximate KTA) Modal Forced Frequency Response Analysis .................................................................... 345
4.3.7.1 Determination of Maximum Dynamic Displacement for Deterministic Frequency Domain Loading by Transforming the Coupled MDOF Linear
Damped ODEs To a Set of Independent (Uncoupled) SDOF ODEs and Solving the Independent Equations in a Manner Similar to Solving a SDOF ODE346
4.4 GL, ML IMPLICIT (COMPLEX) MODAL FREQUENCY RESPONSE ANALYSIS .............................................355
4.5 GL, ML IMPLICIT DIRECT FREQUENCY RESPONSE ANALYSIS ..................................................................358
4.5.3.1 GL, ML Direct Forced Frequency Response Analysis.......................................................................................................................................... 361
4.5.3.2 GL, ML P-∆ (KGA From KEA) Direct Forced Frequency Response Analysis ........................................................................................................ 371
4.5.3.3 GL, ML P-∆ (KGA From Exact or Approximate KTA) Direct Forced Frequency Response Analysis..................................................................... 373
4.5.4.1 The Theory of the Dynamic Magnification Factor for Undamped Motion and Hence the Determination of Maximum Dynamic Displacement, umax
for Deterministic Harmonic Loading by Classically Solving the SDOF Linear Undamped ODE and Maximizing the Solution........................................... 374
4.5.4.2 The Theory of the Dynamic Magnification Factor for Damped Motion and Hence Determination of Maximum Dynamic Displacement, umax for
Deterministic Harmonic Loading by Classically Solving the SDOF Linear Damped ODE and Maximizing the Solution .................................................... 376
4.5.4.3 The Theory of Vibration (Base) Isolation and the Force Transmitted Into Rigid Foundation by the Damped Structure Subjected to Deterministic
Harmonic Loading................................................................................................................................................................................................................. 381
4.5.4.4 The Theory of Vibration (Base) Isolation and the Determination of Maximum Dynamic Displacement, umax for Deterministic Harmonic Support
Motion (Displacement, Velocity or Acceleration) by Classically Solving the SDOF Linear Damped ODE (in Absolute and Relative Terms) and Maximizing
the Solution ........................................................................................................................................................................................................................... 383
4.6 GL, ML FREQUENCY DOMAIN ANALYSIS – DETERMINISTIC AND RANDOM DYNAMIC RESPONSE
ANALYSIS .................................................................................................................................................................386
4.6.1 Mathematical Preliminaries of Representing Dynamic Characteristics in the Frequency Domain ......................................386
4.6.2 GL, ML Vibration Testing ...........................................................................................................................................................387
4.6.2.1 Vibration Testing for Model Correlation .............................................................................................................................................................. 387
4.6.2.2 Vibrating Testing For Analysis Procedure Verification ........................................................................................................................................ 390
4.6.3 GL, ML Steady-State Response of Deterministic Periodic (Not Necessarily Harmonic) Long Duration Excitation Utilizing
Fourier Series (or Generally Utilizing Fast Fourier Transforms FFT) .................................................................................................391
4.6.3.1 Fourier Series........................................................................................................................................................................................................ 391
4.6.3.2 Discrete Fourier Series.......................................................................................................................................................................................... 392
4.6.3.3 Discrete Fourier Series in Complex Notation........................................................................................................................................................ 393
4.6.3.4 Double Sided Discrete Fourier Series in Complex Notation ................................................................................................................................. 394
4.6.3.5 Normalized Double Sided Discrete Fourier Series in Complex Notation.............................................................................................................. 395
4.6.3.6 Symmetrical Normalized Double Sided Discrete Fourier Series in Complex Notation......................................................................................... 396
4.6.3.7 Symmetrical Normalized Single Sided Discrete Fourier Series in Complex Notation .......................................................................................... 397
4.6.3.8 Practicalities of the Specification of the Fast Fourier Transform (FFT) Representation ....................................................................................... 398
4.6.3.9 MSC.NASTRAN Fast Fourier Transform Analysis Methodology........................................................................................................................ 400
4.6.4 GL, ML Steady-State Response of Random, Gaussian, and Stationary (and Ergodic) Excitations Utilizing Power Spectral
Density (PSD) Functions............................................................................................................................................................................403
4.6.4.1 Statistic of Time Domain Function ....................................................................................................................................................................... 403
4.6.4.2 Definition of the Power Spectral Density (PSD)................................................................................................................................................... 407
4.6.4.3 Validity of the PSD Representation ...................................................................................................................................................................... 410
4.6.4.4 Generation and Specification of the PSD.............................................................................................................................................................. 411
4.6.4.5 Statistical Information Provided by the PSD......................................................................................................................................................... 412
4.6.4.6 MSC.NASTRAN Random Analysis Methodology ............................................................................................................................................... 415
4.7 GL, ML IMPLICIT (REAL) MODAL TRANSIENT RESPONSE ANALYSIS ......................................................419
4.7.3 Capability of A Finite Number of Modes To Model The Static and Dynamic Response of Structure...................................424
4.7.4 Concepts of Equivalent Static Force ...........................................................................................................................................433
4.7.5 Structural Damping in Time Domain Analyses..........................................................................................................................435
4.7.6.1 GL, ML Modal Forced Transient Response Analysis ........................................................................................................................................... 437
4.7.6.2 GL, ML P-∆ (KGA From KEA) Modal Forced Transient Response Analysis.......................................................................................................... 440
4
Second Edition
4.7.6.3 GL, ML P-∆ (KGA From Exact or Approximate KTA) Modal Forced Transient Response Analysis ...................................................................... 442
4.7.7.1 Determination of Maximum Dynamic Displacement for Deterministic Time Domain Loading by Transforming the Coupled MDOF Linear
Undamped ODEs To a Set of Independent (Uncoupled) SDOF ODEs and Solving the Independent Equations in a Manner Similar to Solving a SDOF ODE
443
4.7.7.2 Determination of Max Dynamic Displacement for Deterministic Time Domain Support Motion (Displacement, Velocity or Acceleration) by
Transforming the Coupled MDOF Linear Undamped ODEs (In Relative Terms) To a Set of Independent (Uncoupled) SDOF ODEs (In Relative Terms) and
Solving the Independent Equations in a Manner Similar to Solving a SDOF ODE ............................................................................................................... 452
4.7.7.3 Determination of Maximum Dynamic Displacement for Deterministic Time Domain Loading by Transforming the Coupled Distributed System
Linear Damped ODEs (from the governing PDE) To A Set of Independent (Uncoupled) SDOF ODEs and Solving the Independent Equations in a Manner
Similar to Solving a SDOF ODE ........................................................................................................................................................................................... 456
4.8 GL, ML IMPLICIT DIRECT TRANSIENT RESPONSE ANALYSIS ...................................................................457
4.8.3.1 GL, ML Direct Forced Transient Response Analysis............................................................................................................................................ 460
4.8.3.2 GL, ML P-∆ (KGA From KEA) Direct Forced Transient Response Analysis .......................................................................................................... 470
4.8.3.3 GL, ML P-∆ (KGA From Exact or Approximate KTA) Direct Forced Transient Response Analysis ...................................................................... 472
4.8.4.1 Determination of Maximum Dynamic Displacement, umax by Solving the SDOF Undamped/Damped Linear Equation of Motion ODE for
Deterministic Time Domain Loading With/Without Initial Conditions Using the Convolution Integral (Duhamel’s integral) ............................................. 473
4.8.4.2 Determination of Maximum Dynamic Displacement, umax by Solving the SDOF Undamped/Damped Linear Equation of Motion ODE (In
Relative Terms) for Deterministic Time Domain Support Motion (Displacement, Velocity or Acceleration) With/Without Initial Conditions Using the
Convolution Integral (Duhamel’s integral) ............................................................................................................................................................................ 480
4.9 GNL, MNL IMPLICIT AND EXPLICIT DIRECT TRANSIENT RESPONSE ANALYSIS .....................................481
4.9.2 Deterministic Non-Periodic Short Duration Impulse (a.k.a. Blast) Loading Functions With Subsequent Wave Propagation
482
4.9.3 Projectile Crash (a.k.a. Impact) (and Impulsive Blast) Analysis With Subsequent Wave Propagation................................483
4.9.4 Brittle Snap or Redundancy Check Excitation ..........................................................................................................................486
4.9.5 GNL, MNL Explicit Central FD Scheme for Newton’s Dynamic Equilibrium ODE (LS-DYNA).........................................491
4.9.5.1 Solution of Partial or Ordinary Differential Equations Using Finite Difference (FD) Schemes ............................................................................ 491
4.9.5.2 Mathematical Formulation of Analysis – Explicit Central Finite Difference Scheme........................................................................................... 492
4.9.5.3 Stability................................................................................................................................................................................................................. 493
4.9.5.4 Accuracy............................................................................................................................................................................................................... 494
4.9.6 GNL, MNL Implicit Newmark Scheme for Newton’s Dynamic Equilibrium ODE (MSC.NASTRAN)................................495
4.9.6.1 Mathematical Formulation of Analysis – Implicit Newmark Scheme................................................................................................................... 495
4.9.6.2 Stability................................................................................................................................................................................................................. 497
4.9.6.3 Accuracy............................................................................................................................................................................................................... 497
4.9.7 Comparison Between Implicit and Explicit Time Integration Schemes...................................................................................498
4.9.8.1 GNL, MNL Direct Forced (Implicit) Transient Response Analysis ...................................................................................................................... 500
4.9.8.2 Nonlinear Static Analysis and Nonlinear Transient Analysis................................................................................................................................ 504
4.9.8.3 Restart From Nonlinear Static Analysis SOL 106 Into Nonlinear Transient Analysis SOL 129 ........................................................................... 504
4.9.8.4 Restart From Nonlinear Transient Analysis SOL 129 Into Nonlinear Transient Analysis SOL 129 ..................................................................... 504
4.9.8.5 Implicit Nonlinear (Static and) Dynamic Analysis SOL 400 ................................................................................................................................ 505
4.9.8.6 Implicit Nonlinear (Static and) Dynamic Analysis SOL 600 ................................................................................................................................ 505
4.9.8.7 Explicit Nonlinear Dynamic Analysis SOL 700 ................................................................................................................................................... 505
4.9.9 LS-DYNA Decks ...........................................................................................................................................................................506
4.9.9.1 GNL, MNL Direct Forced (Explicit) Transient Response Analysis ...................................................................................................................... 506
4.9.10 Hand Methods Verification........................................................................................................................................................508
4.9.10.1 Determination of Displacement Response Time History by Solving the SDOF Nonlinear (in Stiffness, Damping and Displacement) Equation of
Motion ODE for Deterministic Time Domain Loading With/Without Initial Conditions by Implicit Newmark-β Time Integration Schemes ..................... 508
5 ADVANCED APPLICATIONS OF METHODS OF STATIC AND DYNAMIC ANALYSES ...............510
5.1 EARTHQUAKE INDUCED VIBRATIONS ..........................................................................................................510

5.1.1 Engineering Seismology ...............................................................................................................................................................510
5.1.1.1 Seismic Risk ......................................................................................................................................................................................................... 510
5.1.1.2 Physics of the Earth .............................................................................................................................................................................................. 510
5.1.1.3 Plate Tectonics...................................................................................................................................................................................................... 510
5.1.1.4 Global Seismicity.................................................................................................................................................................................................. 510
5.1.1.5 Mechanism of Earthquakes: Elastic Rebound ....................................................................................................................................................... 511
5.1.1.6 Fault Rupture Classification.................................................................................................................................................................................. 511
5.1.1.7 Seismic Waves...................................................................................................................................................................................................... 512
5.1.1.8 Accelerographs and Seismographs........................................................................................................................................................................ 512
5.1.1.9 Earthquake Location Parameters........................................................................................................................................................................... 513
5.1.1.10 Estimation of Location of Focus or Epicentre..................................................................................................................................................... 513
5
Second Edition
5.1.1.11 Estimation of Focal Depth .................................................................................................................................................................................. 513

5.1.1.12 Estimation of Time of Earthquake Occurrence ................................................................................................................................................... 513
5.1.1.13 Earthquake Magnitude ........................................................................................................................................................................................ 514
5.1.1.14 Evaluation of Regional Seismicity...................................................................................................................................................................... 516
5.1.1.15 Intensity .............................................................................................................................................................................................................. 516
5.1.1.16 Characterisation of Strong Motion...................................................................................................................................................................... 516
5.1.1.17 Attenuation Relationship..................................................................................................................................................................................... 517
5.1.1.18 Seismic Hazard Evaluation Procedure: Seismic Hazard Curves and Seismic Hazard Maps ............................................................................... 518
5.1.1.19 Seismic Hazard Evaluation Procedure: Design Response Spectra ...................................................................................................................... 519
5.1.2 Effect of Local Soil Conditions on the Seismic Hazard..............................................................................................................521
5.1.2.1 Elastic Soil Properties ........................................................................................................................................................................................... 521
5.1.2.2 Dynamic Response of Soil .................................................................................................................................................................................... 522
5.1.2.3 Liquefaction.......................................................................................................................................................................................................... 523
5.1.2.4 Residual Strength of Liquefied Soils..................................................................................................................................................................... 523
5.1.2.5 Assessment of Liquefaction Potential ................................................................................................................................................................... 524
5.1.2.6 Post-Seismic Failure due to Liquefaction.............................................................................................................................................................. 525
5.1.2.7 Methods of Improving Liquefiable Soils .............................................................................................................................................................. 526
5.1.2.8 Effect of Soil Layer on Ground Response............................................................................................................................................................. 526
5.1.2.9 Motion of Shear Waves in Elastic Media.............................................................................................................................................................. 526
5.1.2.10 Impedance (or Radiation) Effect ......................................................................................................................................................................... 527
5.1.2.11 Increase in Duration of Strong Motion................................................................................................................................................................ 528
5.1.2.12 Resonance Effect ................................................................................................................................................................................................ 529
5.1.2.13 Methods of Evaluating Layer Response.............................................................................................................................................................. 530
5.1.2.14 Critical Acceleration ........................................................................................................................................................................................... 531
5.1.2.15 Effect of Local Soil Conditions on Seismic Hazard Design Procedure Summary............................................................................................... 532
5.1.3 Conceptual Structural Design for RC Structures in Seismic Regions .....................................................................................542
5.1.3.1 Plan Layout........................................................................................................................................................................................................... 542
5.1.3.2 Elevation............................................................................................................................................................................................................... 542
5.1.3.3 Beam and Column Axes ....................................................................................................................................................................................... 542
5.1.3.4 Foundation Design................................................................................................................................................................................................ 543
5.1.3.5 Columns................................................................................................................................................................................................................ 543
5.1.3.6 Member Capacity at Connections ......................................................................................................................................................................... 543
5.1.3.7 Floor Slabs............................................................................................................................................................................................................ 543
5.1.3.8 Infill Panels........................................................................................................................................................................................................... 543
5.1.3.9 Building Separation .............................................................................................................................................................................................. 544
5.1.3.10 Architectural Elements........................................................................................................................................................................................ 544
5.1.3.11 General Robustness............................................................................................................................................................................................. 544
5.1.3.12 Detailing Requirements and Ductile Response ................................................................................................................................................... 544
5.1.3.13 Eurocode 8 Conceptual Design ........................................................................................................................................................................... 544
5.1.4 Methods of Structural Analysis ...................................................................................................................................................547
5.1.5 GL, ML Shock and Response Spectrum Analysis......................................................................................................................548
5.1.5.1 Nature of the Dynamic Loading Function............................................................................................................................................................. 548
5.1.5.2 The Response Spectra ........................................................................................................................................................................................... 548
5.1.5.3 GL, ML SDOF Response Spectrum Analysis – Equivalent Lateral Static Force Method ..................................................................................... 565
5.1.5.4 GL, ML MDOF Response Spectrum Analysis – Multi-Modal Seismic Analysis ................................................................................................. 570
5.1.5.5 Example Application EC8 .................................................................................................................................................................................... 576
5.1.5.6 MSC.NASTRAN Decks ....................................................................................................................................................................................... 585
5.1.6 Reinforced Concrete Design to EC8 for Earthquake Effects Based on Response Spectrum Analysis ..................................590
5.1.6.1 Concepts of Ductility ............................................................................................................................................................................................ 590
5.1.6.2 Capacity Design for Optimum Location and Sequence of Attainment of Member Capacity ................................................................................ 591
5.1.6.3 Capacity Design for Favourable Mechanism of Deformation ............................................................................................................................... 591
5.1.6.4 Introduction of Example Problem ......................................................................................................................................................................... 592
5.1.6.5 Design Data .......................................................................................................................................................................................................... 592
5.1.6.6 Beam Design for Vertical Loading According to EC2.......................................................................................................................................... 592
5.1.6.7 Capacity Check for Seismic Loading of Beams .................................................................................................................................................... 598
5.1.6.8 Design of Transverse Reinforcement .................................................................................................................................................................... 599
5.1.6.9 Column Design ..................................................................................................................................................................................................... 600
5.1.6.10 Detailing of Beams ............................................................................................................................................................................................. 607
5.1.7 Steel Design to EC8 for Earthquake Effects Based on Response Spectrum Analysis .............................................................608
5.1.8 Timber Design to EC8 for Earthquake Effects Based on Response Spectrum Analysis.........................................................609
5.1.9 Masonry Design to EC8 for Earthquake Effects Based on Response Spectrum Analysis ......................................................610
5.1.10 Performance Based Seismic Analysis and Design ....................................................................................................................611
5.2 GL, ML HUMAN FOOTFALL INDUCED VIBRATIONS ..................................................................................612
5.2.1 Limitations ....................................................................................................................................................................................612
5.2.2 Finite Element Mesh and Model Parameters .............................................................................................................................612
5.2.3 (Non-Crowd or Asynchronous) Human Induced Vertical Footfall Vibrations from Walking ..............................................615
5.2.3.1 Dynamic Response To Vertical Dynamic Forces From Walking on Flat and on Stairs ........................................................................................ 615
5.2.3.2 Serviceability Acceptance Criteria........................................................................................................................................................................ 626
5.2.3.3 Practical Solutions ................................................................................................................................................................................................ 628
5.2.4 (Non-Crowd or Asynchronous) Human Induced Vertical Footfall Vibrations from Sports in Halls ...................................629
6
Second Edition
5.2.5 Crowd Induced (Synchronous) Vertical Footfall Vibrations for Gymnasium Floors, Dance Floors, Stadium Tiers, Theatre
Tiers and Balconies ...................................................................................................................................................................................630
5.2.6 Crowd Induced (Synchronous) Lateral Vibrations ..................................................................................................................633
5.3 GL, ML DYNAMIC INFLUENCE LINE ANALYSIS FOR TRAIN EXCITATIONS ON BRIDGES.........................636
5.4 GL, ML FLUID (WIND & WATER) - STRUCTURE INTERACTION (AEROELASTIC RESPONSE ANALYSIS) 639
5.4.1 Elementary Hydraulics.................................................................................................................................................................640
5.4.1.1 Pipeline Design (Application of the Steady and Unsteady Bernoulli’s Equation)................................................................................................. 640
5.4.1.2 Elementary Wave Mechanics (Small Amplitude Wave Theory)........................................................................................................................... 725
5.4.2 Static Aeroelastic Response..........................................................................................................................................................732
5.4.2.1 Along-Flow Direction Drag (Pressure Drag and Skin-Friction Drag) (Limited Amplitude Response) ................................................................. 733
5.4.2.2 Across-Flow Direction Lift (Pressure Lift and Skin-Friction Lift) (Limited Amplitude Response) ...................................................................... 735
5.4.2.3 Non-Oscillatory Torsional Divergence (Divergent Amplitude Response) ............................................................................................................ 736
5.4.3 Dynamic Aeroelastic Response ....................................................................................................................................................740
5.4.3.1 Along- and Across-Flow Direction Unsteady Inertial Forces on General Submerged Structures Due to Water Waves (Limited Amplitude
Response) 740
5.4.3.2 Along- and Across-Flow Direction Unsteady Inertial Forces on Cylindrical Submerged Structures Due to Water Waves (And Along-Flow
Direction Drag Forces Due to Steady Currents) (Limited Amplitude Response)................................................................................................................... 741
5.4.3.3 Along-Flow Direction Gust Response (And Along-Flow Direction Drag Forces Due to Steady Mean Wind) (Limited Amplitude Response) ... 744
5.4.3.4 Along-Flow Direction Buffeting Response (Limited Amplitude Response) ......................................................................................................... 761
5.4.3.5 Across-Flow Direction Von Karman Vortex Shedding Induced Response (Limited Amplitude Response) ......................................................... 762
5.4.4 Dynamic Aeroelastic Stability......................................................................................................................................................777
5.4.4.1 Across-Flow Direction Galloping and Stall Flutter (Divergent Amplitude Response).......................................................................................... 777
5.4.4.2 Across-Flow Direction Classical Flutter (Divergent Amplitude Response) .......................................................................................................... 788
5.5 GL, ML VIBRATION FATIGUE ANALYSIS.....................................................................................................796
5.5.1 Maximum Absolute Principal Stress or Strain Field Generation in the Time or Frequency Domain...................................797
5.5.1.1 Choice of Analysis Method................................................................................................................................................................................... 797
5.5.1.2 GL, ML Pseudo-Static Analysis ........................................................................................................................................................................... 798
5.5.1.3 GL, ML Transient Analysis .................................................................................................................................................................................. 799
5.5.1.4 GL, ML Modal Superposition Transient Analysis ................................................................................................................................................ 800
5.5.1.5 GL, ML Frequency Domain Stationary (and Ergodic) Random Analysis............................................................................................................. 801
5.5.2 Stress-Life (S-N), Strain-Life (E-N) or Crack Propagation LEFM Uniaxial Fatigue Analysis ..............................................802
5.5.2.1 Stress-Life (S-N) (Total Life) Uniaxial Fatigue Analysis ..................................................................................................................................... 803
5.5.2.2 Strain-Life (E-N) (Crack Initiation) Uniaxial Fatigue Analysis ............................................................................................................................ 812
5.5.2.3 Crack Propagation LEFM Uniaxial Fatigue Analysis ........................................................................................................................................... 813
5.5.3 Stress-Life (S-N), Strain-Life (E-N) or Crack Propagation LEFM Multi-axial Fatigue Analysis .........................................814
5.6 GL, ML PASSIVE STRUCTURAL MOTION CONTROL ...................................................................................815
5.6.1 Optimum Stiffness and Mass Distribution..................................................................................................................................815
5.6.1.1 Concepts of Forced Frequency Response of Deterministic Periodic Harmonic Load Excitations......................................................................... 815
5.6.1.2 Concepts of Forced Transient Response of Deterministic Load Excitations ......................................................................................................... 818
5.6.1.3 Concepts of Forced Frequency Response of Deterministic Periodic Harmonic Base Excitations ......................................................................... 822
5.6.1.4 Concepts of Forced Transient Response of Deterministic Base Excitations.......................................................................................................... 823
5.6.1.5 Concepts of Forced Transient Response (Response Spectrum Analysis) of Random Non-Stationary Base Excitations ....................................... 824
5.6.2 Optimum Damping Distribution .................................................................................................................................................825
5.6.2.1 Elemental Damping Mathematical Models ........................................................................................................................................................... 825
5.6.2.2 Modal Damping Mathematical Models................................................................................................................................................................. 834
5.6.2.3 Global Damping Mathematical Models ................................................................................................................................................................ 837
5.6.2.4 Damping Formulation Conclusions ...................................................................................................................................................................... 839
5.6.3 GL, ML Base Isolation Systems...................................................................................................................................................840
5.6.3.1 Controlling Displacement Response From Harmonic Load Excitations ............................................................................................................... 840
5.6.3.2 Controlling Acceleration Response From Harmonic Load Excitations................................................................................................................. 840
5.6.3.3 Base Isolation - Controlling Displacement Response From Harmonic Base Enforced Motion ............................................................................. 841
5.6.3.4 Base Isolation - Controlling Acceleration Response From Harmonic Base Enforced Motion .............................................................................. 842
5.6.3.5 Base Isolation – Controlling Force Transmitted Into Foundation From Harmonic Load Excitations.................................................................... 844
5.6.4 GL, ML Tuned Mass Damper (TMD) Systems ..........................................................................................................................845
5.6.4.1 Damped SDOF System Subject to Harmonic Force and Support Motion Excitations .......................................................................................... 848
5.6.4.2 Undamped Structure, Undamped TMD System Subject to Harmonic Force Excitation ....................................................................................... 849
5.6.4.3 Undamped Structure, Damped TMD System Subject to Harmonic Force Excitation ........................................................................................... 851
5.6.4.4 Undamped Structure, Damped TMD System Subject to Harmonic Support Motion ............................................................................................ 857
5.6.4.5 Damped Structure, Damped TMD System Subject to Harmonic Force and Support Motion................................................................................ 859
5.6.4.6 TMD Analysis Summary (Warburton, 1982)........................................................................................................................................................ 861
5.6.5 GL, ML Tuned Slosh Damper (TSD) Systems ..........................................................................................................................863
5.6.5.1 When To Employ TSDs........................................................................................................................................................................................ 863
5.6.5.2 Operations of TSDs .............................................................................................................................................................................................. 863
5.6.5.3 Deep or Shallow Tank?......................................................................................................................................................................................... 871
5.6.5.4 Testing .................................................................................................................................................................................................................. 872
5.6.5.5 Miscellaneous Design Information ....................................................................................................................................................................... 873
5.6.5.6 Design Procedure for Deep Tank TSDs ................................................................................................................................................................ 874
5.7 GL, ML ACTIVE STRUCTURAL MOTION CONTROL – CONTROL SYSTEM ANALYSIS...............................875
5.8 FIBRE REINFORCED POLYMER (FRP) ANALYSIS AND DESIGN ..................................................................876
7
Second Edition
5.8.1 Introduction ..................................................................................................................................................................................876

5.8.2 The Reinforcement Fibre .............................................................................................................................................................876
5.8.3 The Polymer (Resin) Matrix ........................................................................................................................................................878
5.8.4 The Additives ................................................................................................................................................................................880
5.8.5 The Composite Laminate Forming Processes.............................................................................................................................881
5.8.6 Modelling and Analyzing Fibre Reinforced Polymer (FRP) Composite Laminates in MSC.NASTRAN .............................882
5.8.6.1 The Ply.................................................................................................................................................................................................................. 882
5.8.6.2 The Composite Laminate, Sandwich Structures and Structural Members with Attached Laminates .................................................................... 886
5.8.6.3 Failure Mode and Failure Criteria of the Composite Laminate ............................................................................................................................. 888
5.8.6.4 MSC.NASTRAN Finite Element Modelling of Composite Laminate Summary .................................................................................................. 890
6 FINITE ELEMENT MODELLING TECHNIQUES AND MSC.NASTRAN CARDS COMMON TO

ALL ANALYSES....................................................................................................................................................892
6.1 INPUT DECK .DAT FORMAT ...........................................................................................................................892

6.2 GRID CARDS ...................................................................................................................................................895
6.3 FINITE ELEMENT MODELLING TECHNIQUES ..............................................................................................896
6.3.1 Nature of the Finite Element Method..........................................................................................................................................896
6.3.2 Finite Element Displacement Interpolation Function, Output Stress Variation, and Corresponding Order of Error in
Displacement and Stress............................................................................................................................................................................897
6.3.2.1 One Dimensional Beam Finite Element ................................................................................................................................................................ 898
6.3.2.2 Two Dimensional Shell Elements (In-Plane Plane Stress or Plane Strain Membrane Stiffness) ........................................................................... 900
6.3.2.3 Two Dimensional Shell Elements (Out of Plane Bending, Shear and Torsional Plate Stiffness) ......................................................................... 903
6.3.2.4 Three Dimensional Solid Elements....................................................................................................................................................................... 907
6.3.3 Finite Element Modelling For Static Analyses ...........................................................................................................................908
6.3.3.1 Choice of Finite Element to Model the Load Path and Deformation..................................................................................................................... 908
6.3.3.2 Concepts of Stiffness ............................................................................................................................................................................................ 908
6.3.4 Finite Element Modelling For Dynamic Analyses......................................................................................................................909
6.3.4.1 Mass and Stiffness Distribution ............................................................................................................................................................................ 909
6.3.4.2 Nonstructural Mass ............................................................................................................................................................................................... 909
6.3.5 Modelling Mechanisms With Inertia Relief – Modelling Displacement Effects Due to Applied Loads On Systems in
Conditionally Stable Equilibrium.............................................................................................................................................................911
6.3.6 Submodelling Techniques for Static Analysis ............................................................................................................................913
6.3.6.1 Submodelling by Substructuring – Static Condensation (Guyan Reduction) using Superelements....................................................................... 913
6.3.6.2 Submodelling – Boundary Internal Force Method ................................................................................................................................................ 919
6.3.6.3 Submodelling – Boundary Internal Force Method of Substructure Isostatically Mounted Over Rest of Structure................................................ 922
6.3.6.4 Boundary Enforced Displacement Method ........................................................................................................................................................... 923
6.3.6.5 Numerical Example of Submodelling ................................................................................................................................................................... 924
6.3.6.6 Static Submodelling Methods Summary ............................................................................................................................................................... 929
6.3.7 Submodelling Techniques for Dynamic Analysis .......................................................................................................................930
6.3.7.1 Submodelling by Substructuring - Static Condensation (Guyan Reduction) using Superelements ....................................................................... 930
6.3.7.2 Submodelling by Substructuring - Generalized Dynamic Reduction (GDR) using Superelements....................................................................... 930
6.3.7.3 Submodelling by Substructuring - Component Mode Synthesis (CMS) using Superelements.............................................................................. 930
6.3.8 Modelling Flat Plates Using 2D Shells or 1D Grillages..............................................................................................................931
6.3.9 Modelling Down-Stand Beams on Structural Floors, Pile Caps and Changes in Thickness of Plates ...................................931
6.3.10 Modelling Stiffened Plates..........................................................................................................................................................931
6.3.11 Modelling Connections ...............................................................................................................................................................932
6.3.12 Modelling Spot Welds.................................................................................................................................................................933
6.3.13 Modelling Bolts ...........................................................................................................................................................................933
6.3.14 Modelling Applied Loads ...........................................................................................................................................................934
6.3.14.1 Applied Concentrated Loads on One Dimensional Elements.............................................................................................................................. 934
6.3.14.2 Applied Face and Line Loads on Two and Three Dimensional Elements ........................................................................................................... 934
6.3.14.3 Applied Concentrated Loads on Two and Three Dimensional Elements ............................................................................................................ 935
6.3.15 Modelling Support Conditions...................................................................................................................................................936
6.3.16 Primary and Secondary Component in Dynamic Analysis .....................................................................................................937
6.3.17 Modelling Rigid Body Motion....................................................................................................................................................937
6.3.18 Meshing Strategies......................................................................................................................................................................938
6.3.19 Mesh Transition Techniques......................................................................................................................................................939
6.3.19.1 Connecting 1D Elements to 2D Elements ........................................................................................................................................................... 939
6.3.19.4 Fine to Coarse Mesh Transitions in Shell Meshes............................................................................................................................................... 942
6.3.20 Stress Singularity (Artificial Stress Concentration) and St. Venant’s Principle in Linear and Nonlinear (Material)
Analysis 943
6.3.21 Modelling Preload (Prestress)....................................................................................................................................................945
6.3.21.1 Temperature Load Method.................................................................................................................................................................................. 945
8
Second Edition
6.3.21.2 MPC Constraint Method ..................................................................................................................................................................................... 945

6.3.21.3 GAP Element Method......................................................................................................................................................................................... 945
6.3.22 Modelling Symmetry ..................................................................................................................................................................946
6.3.23 Multi-Point Constraints (MPC) ................................................................................................................................................947
6.3.24 Model Checkout ..........................................................................................................................................................................949
6.3.24.1 Grid Point Singularities (AUTOSPC, EPZERO, K6ROT, SNORM).................................................................................................................. 949
6.3.24.2 Mechanism Singularity of Stiffness Matrix (MAXRATIO, BAILOUT)............................................................................................................. 952
6.3.24.3 Grid Point Singularities (AUTOSPC, K6ROT) and Local and Global Mechanism Singularity (MAXRATIO, BAILOUT) for Linear, Nonlinear,
Static and Dynamic Solutions................................................................................................................................................................................................ 954
6.3.24.4 Ill-Conditioning of Stiffness Matrix (EPSILON, Load and Reaction Discrepancy PRTRESLT)........................................................................ 955
6.3.24.5 Grid Point Weight Generator .............................................................................................................................................................................. 957
6.3.24.6 Displacement Compatibility Check .................................................................................................................................................................... 957
6.3.24.7 Element Quality Checks ..................................................................................................................................................................................... 958
6.3.24.8 Maximum Values................................................................................................................................................................................................ 959
6.3.24.9 Element Orientation Check................................................................................................................................................................................. 959
6.3.24.10 Duplicate Grid and Element Check................................................................................................................................................................... 959
6.3.24.11 Element Summary Table................................................................................................................................................................................... 959
6.3.24.12 Unconstrained Equilibrium Check (Grounding Check) .................................................................................................................................... 960
6.3.24.13 Deformed Shape ............................................................................................................................................................................................... 962
6.3.24.14 Massless Mechanisms....................................................................................................................................................................................... 962
6.3.25 Isoparametric Elements and Numerical Integration ..............................................................................................................963
6.3.26 Element and Nodal Stress Recovery .........................................................................................................................................970
6.3.26.1 Stress Recovery at Gauss Points ......................................................................................................................................................................... 970
6.3.26.2 Extrapolation of Stress From Gauss Points to Element Grids ............................................................................................................................. 971
6.3.26.3 (Transformation into Global Coordinates and) Averaging of the Elemental Grid Stresses to Yield the Grid Point Stresses............................... 972
6.3.26.4 Element Stress Recovery Procedures in MSC.NASTRAN ................................................................................................................................. 973
6.3.26.5 Grid Point Stresses in MSC.NASTRAN ............................................................................................................................................................. 977
6.3.27 Full Integration Quadrature, Reduced Integration Quadrature and Optimal Gauss Sampling Points ..............................979
6.3.28 Stress Interpretation...................................................................................................................................................................981
6.3.28.1 State of Stress i.e. Global Coordinate Stress Tensors σxx , σyy , σzz , τxy , τyz , τzx ................................................................................................. 982
6.3.28.2 Failure Criteria.................................................................................................................................................................................................... 983
6.3.28.3 Deriving Forces (Moments, Shear, Torsion & Axial Force) from Stresses in Shells........................................................................................... 990
6.3.29 The Element Strain Energy Density..........................................................................................................................................991
6.3.30 Error Estimation.........................................................................................................................................................................993
6.3.30.1 GL, ML Analysis Error Estimation: h- or p- Refinement.................................................................................................................................... 993
6.3.30.2 GNL, MNL Analysis Error Estimation: h- or p- Refinement .............................................................................................................................. 993
6.3.30.3 Adaptive Analysis in MSC.NASTRAN with p-Elements ................................................................................................................................... 994
6.3.30.4 Stress Discontinuity Error Estimator................................................................................................................................................................... 997
6.3.30.5 Hand Verification: Deriving Stresses From Forces (Axial, Moments, Shear and Torsion) in Beam Elements and Stresses Due to External
Loading of General Shell and Solid Continuum .................................................................................................................................................................. 1000
6.4 STIFFNESS ELEMENT CARDS .......................................................................................................................1003
6.4.1 Scalar CELAS Element ..............................................................................................................................................................1004
6.4.2 One-Dimensional Element Cards ..............................................................................................................................................1005
6.4.2.1 Axial and Torsional Stiffness CROD, CONROD, CTUBE Elements ................................................................................................................. 1005
6.4.2.2 CBAR Element ................................................................................................................................................................................................... 1008
6.4.2.3 CBEAM Element................................................................................................................................................................................................ 1018
6.4.2.4 CBEND Element ................................................................................................................................................................................................ 1019
6.4.3 Two-Dimensional Element Cards..............................................................................................................................................1020
6.4.3.1 Transverse Bending, Transverse Shear and In-Plane Membrane (Plane Stress or Plane Strain) CQUAD4, CQUAD8, CTRIA3, CTRIA6 Elements
1020
6.4.3.2 In-Plane Shear and Extension CSHEAR Elements ............................................................................................................................................. 1023
6.4.3.3 CRACK2D.......................................................................................................................................................................................................... 1023
6.4.4 Three-Dimensional Element Cards ...........................................................................................................................................1024
6.4.4.1 CHEXA8 or CHEXA20 Element........................................................................................................................................................................ 1025
6.4.4.2 CPENTA6 or CPENTA15 Element .................................................................................................................................................................... 1025
6.4.4.3 CTETRA4 or CTETRA10 Element .................................................................................................................................................................... 1025
6.4.4.4 CRACK3D.......................................................................................................................................................................................................... 1025
6.5 MASS ELEMENT CARDS ...............................................................................................................................1026
6.6 DAMPING ELEMENT CARDS ........................................................................................................................1028
6.6.1
Viscous Damping Elements CDAMP and CVISC....................................................................................................................1028
6.6.2
Structural Damping Elements ...................................................................................................................................................1028
6.7 GENERAL NONLINEAR EXCITATION FREQUENCY DEPENDENT SPRING AND LINEAR EXCITATION
FREQUENCY DEPENDENT DAMPER CBUSH (PBUSH AND PBUSHT) ELEMENT ............................................1029
6.8 ONE DIMENSIONAL NONLINEAR SPRING AND NONLINEAR DAMPER CBUSH1D (PBUSH1D) ELEMENT
1030
6.9 MATERIAL CARDS........................................................................................................................................1031
6.9.1 Linear, Elastic, Isotropic Material Card for 1-D, 2-D and 3-D Elements MAT1 ..................................................................1031
6.9.2 Linear, Elastic, Anisotropic Elastic Material for Shell MAT2 and Solid Elements MAT9 ..................................................1031
9
Second Edition
6.9.3 Linear, Elastic, Orthotropic Elastic Material for Shell Elements MAT8 and Solid Elements MAT9 .................................1031
6.10 RIGID ELEMENT CARDS ............................................................................................................................1032
6.11 BOUNDARY CONDITIONS ...........................................................................................................................1035
6.11.1 Single Point Constraints (SPCs) ..............................................................................................................................................1035
6.12 LINEAR OPTIMIZATION SOL 200 .............................................................................................................1036
6.12.1 Objective Function and Constraints........................................................................................................................................1036
6.12.2 Design Variables and Constraints ...........................................................................................................................................1036
6.12.3 Optimization Control Parameters ...........................................................................................................................................1037
6.13 COMPUTATIONAL MEMORY AND PROCESSING POWER DEMAND..........................................................1037
7 LS-DYNA CARDS .........................................................................................................................................1038
7.1 KEYWORD FORMAT OF INPUT DECK .........................................................................................................1038

7.2 OUTPUT CARDS ............................................................................................................................................1038
7.2.1
ASCII Output Files.....................................................................................................................................................................1038
7.2.2
BINARY Output Files ................................................................................................................................................................1039
7.3 NODE CARDS ................................................................................................................................................1040
7.4 STIFFNESS ELEMENT CARDS .......................................................................................................................1040
7.4.1 Spring Element Cards ................................................................................................................................................................1042
7.4.2 Beam Element Cards ..................................................................................................................................................................1043
7.4.3 Shell (QUAD4, QUAD8, TRIA3, TRIA6) Element Cards.......................................................................................................1044
7.4.4 Solid (Brick, Wedge, Tetrahedral) Element Cards ..................................................................................................................1046
7.5 MASS AND INERTIA ELEMENT CARDS ........................................................................................................1049
7.6 DAMPING CARDS ..........................................................................................................................................1050
7.7 RIGID ELEMENT CARDS AND STRUCTURAL INTERNAL CONSTRAINTS ...................................................1051
7.7.1 Rigid Body ...................................................................................................................................................................................1051
7.7.1.1 Formulation of Rigid Body Joint ........................................................................................................................................................................ 1051
7.7.1.2 Rigid Body With Mass And Inertia Properties From A Set Of Nodes ................................................................................................................ 1051
7.7.1.3 Rigid Body With Mass And Inertia Properties From An Element ...................................................................................................................... 1051
7.7.1.4 Extra Nodes on Rigid Bodies.............................................................................................................................................................................. 1052
7.7.1.5 Merging Rigid Bodies......................................................................................................................................................................................... 1052
7.7.2 Rigidwall......................................................................................................................................................................................1052
7.7.3 Constraints Between DOFs ........................................................................................................................................................1053
7.7.3.1 Interpolation Constraint ...................................................................................................................................................................................... 1053
7.7.4 Global Restraints ........................................................................................................................................................................1053
7.7.5 Welds and Rivets.........................................................................................................................................................................1054
7.7.5.1 Generalized Spot Weld ....................................................................................................................................................................................... 1054
7.7.5.2 Generalized Fillet Weld ...................................................................................................................................................................................... 1054
7.7.5.3 Generalized Butt Weld........................................................................................................................................................................................ 1054
7.7.5.4 Generalized Cross-Fillet Weld ............................................................................................................................................................................ 1054
7.7.5.5 Generalized Combined Weld .............................................................................................................................................................................. 1054
7.7.5.6 Mass-Less Spotweld ........................................................................................................................................................................................... 1054
7.7.5.7 Mass-Less Rivet.................................................................................................................................................................................................. 1054
7.7.6 Concrete Rebars..........................................................................................................................................................................1054
7.8 BOUNDARY CONDITIONS CARDS ................................................................................................................1055
7.8.1 Single Point Constraints SPCs ...................................................................................................................................................1055
7.8.2 Non-Reflecting Boundaries ........................................................................................................................................................1055
7.8.3 Contact Cards .............................................................................................................................................................................1056
7.8.3.1 Rigidwall Contact ............................................................................................................................................................................................... 1056
7.8.3.2 Surface To Surface Contact ................................................................................................................................................................................ 1056
7.8.3.3 Single Surface Contact........................................................................................................................................................................................ 1056
7.8.3.4 Nodes to Surface Contact.................................................................................................................................................................................... 1056
7.8.3.5 Eroding Contacts ................................................................................................................................................................................................ 1056
7.8.3.6 Tied Interface...................................................................................................................................................................................................... 1056
7.9 RESTART CAPABILITIES ..............................................................................................................................1057
8 STRUCTURAL ENGINEERING ................................................................................................................1058
8.1 CONCEPTUAL STRUCTURAL DESIGN ..........................................................................................................1058

8.1.1 Spans and Span to Depth Ratios................................................................................................................................................1058
8.1.2 Steel Single-Storey Buildings .....................................................................................................................................................1059
10
Second Edition
8.1.2.1 Universal Beam – Universal Column (No Pinned or Two-Pinned) Portal Frame ............................................................................................... 1059
8.1.2.2 Universal Beam – Universal Column (Three-Pinned) Portal Frame ................................................................................................................... 1062
8.1.2.3 Truss – Stanchion Portal Frame .......................................................................................................................................................................... 1063
8.1.3 Steel and Reinforced Concrete Multi-Storey (Potentially Tall) Buildings .............................................................................1067
8.1.3.1 Building Geometry and Anatomy ....................................................................................................................................................................... 1067
8.1.3.2 Vertical Gravity and Lateral Stability Systems ................................................................................................................................................... 1070
8.1.3.3 In-Plane Stability (Diaphragm Action) ............................................................................................................................................................... 1082
8.1.3.4 Torsional Stability System .................................................................................................................................................................................. 1085
8.1.3.5 Movement Joints................................................................................................................................................................................................. 1086
8.1.3.6 Transfer Structures.............................................................................................................................................................................................. 1087
8.1.3.7 Structural Floor Systems..................................................................................................................................................................................... 1099
8.1.4 Steel, Reinforced Concrete and Masonry Bridges....................................................................................................................1100
8.1.4.1 Steel and Reinforced Concrete Prismatic (Box or Plate) Girder Bridge.............................................................................................................. 1101
8.1.4.2 Steel and Reinforced Concrete Haunched (Box or Plate) Girder Bridge............................................................................................................. 1102
8.1.4.3 Steel Truss Bridge............................................................................................................................................................................................... 1103
8.1.4.4 Steel Portal Bridge .............................................................................................................................................................................................. 1107
8.1.4.5 Steel, Reinforced Concrete or Masonry Arch Bridge.......................................................................................................................................... 1108
8.1.4.6 Steel Cable Stayed Bridge................................................................................................................................................................................... 1109
8.1.4.7 Steel Suspension Bridge ..................................................................................................................................................................................... 1110
8.1.5 Steel Towers ................................................................................................................................................................................1112
8.1.6 Steel Masts...................................................................................................................................................................................1113
8.1.7 Steel Space Roofs ........................................................................................................................................................................1114
8.1.8 Steel Cable Roofs ........................................................................................................................................................................1115
8.1.9 Steel Grandstands .......................................................................................................................................................................1116
8.1.9.1 Cantilever Grandstand ........................................................................................................................................................................................ 1116
8.1.9.2 Front Girder Grandstand ..................................................................................................................................................................................... 1116
8.1.9.3 Cable Suspended Grandstand.............................................................................................................................................................................. 1116
8.1.10 Reinforced Concrete Shell Roofs .............................................................................................................................................1117
8.1.11 Timber Single-Storey Buildings...............................................................................................................................................1118
8.1.11.1 Beam – Column (No Pinned or Two-Pinned) Portal Frame.............................................................................................................................. 1118
8.1.11.2 Beam – Column (Three-Pinned) Portal Frame.................................................................................................................................................. 1119
8.1.11.3 Truss – Stanchion Portal Frame ........................................................................................................................................................................ 1120
8.1.12 Timber Multi-Storey Buildings................................................................................................................................................1139
8.1.12.1 Timber Floors ................................................................................................................................................................................................... 1139
8.1.13 Masonry Single- and Multi-Storey Buildings .........................................................................................................................1140
8.1.13.1 Lateral Stability Systems .................................................................................................................................................................................. 1140
8.2 APPRECIATION OF LOADING, ULS AND SLS LOAD CASES .......................................................................1141
8.2.1Load Cases...................................................................................................................................................................................1141
8.2.2Load Factors ...............................................................................................................................................................................1147
8.2.3Load Combinations ....................................................................................................................................................................1148
8.3 STANDARD CONSTRUCTION MATERIAL PROPERTIES ...............................................................................1150
8.3.1 Steel, Aluminium and Concrete.................................................................................................................................................1150
8.3.2 Stainless Steel ..............................................................................................................................................................................1152
8.3.3 Cast Iron......................................................................................................................................................................................1156
8.3.4 Wrought Iron ..............................................................................................................................................................................1157
8.4 REINFORCED CONCRETE DESIGN TO BS 8110-PART 1:1997 (BUILDINGS) AND BS 5400-PART 4 (BRIDGES)
1159
8.4.1 ULS Rectangular Beam Design – Bending, Shear and Torsion Effects .................................................................................1159
8.4.1.1 Bending Effects .................................................................................................................................................................................................. 1159
8.4.1.2 Shear and Torsion Effects ................................................................................................................................................................................... 1164
8.4.2 Concepts of Moment Redistribution .........................................................................................................................................1167
8.4.3 ULS Structural Floor Design – Reinforced Concrete ..............................................................................................................1176
8.4.4 ULS Structural Floor Design – Prestressed Concrete..............................................................................................................1177
8.4.4.1 (Precast) Pre-Tensioned ...................................................................................................................................................................................... 1177
8.4.4.2 (Cast Insitu) Post-Tensioned Concrete Floor Systems ........................................................................................................................................ 1177
8.4.5 ULS Column Design – Bending, Axial, Shear and Torsion Effects ........................................................................................1178
8.4.6 ULS Wall Design.........................................................................................................................................................................1179
8.4.7 ULS Connection Design..............................................................................................................................................................1180
8.4.8 ULS Fire Protection Design .......................................................................................................................................................1181
8.4.9 SLS Durability Design ................................................................................................................................................................1182
8.4.10 SLS Deflection Computation and Criteria..............................................................................................................................1183
8.4.11 SLS Crack Width Calculations................................................................................................................................................1193
8.5 PRESTRESSED CONCRETE ANALYSIS AND DESIGN ....................................................................................1194
8.6 STEEL DESIGN TO BS 5950-PART 1:2000 (BUILDINGS) .............................................................................1244
8.6.1 ULS Beam and Column Design – Bending (Incorporating High Shear Effects), Axial, Shear and Buckling Effects ........1244
8.6.2 ULS Plate Girder Beam and Column Design – Bending (Incorporating High Shear Effects), Axial, Shear and Buckling
Effects 1246
11
Second Edition
8.6.3 ULS Structural Floor Design – Composite Steel and Reinforced Concrete...........................................................................1247
8.6.3.1 Floor Framing ..................................................................................................................................................................................................... 1247
8.6.3.2 Simple Steel I-Beam With Non-Composite or Composite Precast (Hollow) Slabs ............................................................................................. 1248
8.6.3.3 Prismatic Steel I-Beam Encased in T-section Reinforced Concrete, Flat Part of the T- Above the Top Flange of I-Beam................................. 1248
8.6.3.4 Prismatic Steel I-Beam Shear Studded Into Flat-Soffit Reinforced Concrete Slab.............................................................................................. 1248
8.6.3.5 Prismatic Steel I-Beam Shear Studded Into (Parallel Or Perpendicular Ribbed) Metal Deck With Reinforced Concrete................................... 1249
8.6.3.6 Prismatic Steel Plate Girder Shear Studded into Flat-Soffit Reinforced Concrete or (Parallel or Perpendicular Ribbed) Metal Deck with
Reinforced Concrete............................................................................................................................................................................................................ 1250
8.6.3.7 Prismatic Steel I-Beam With Stub Girder And Reinforced Concrete Slab .......................................................................................................... 1250
8.6.3.8 Prismatic Steel I-Beam With Web Openings, Castellated Beam, Cellular Beam or Westok Beam Shear Studded into Flat-Soffit Reinforced
Concrete or (Parallel or Perpendicular Ribbed) Metal Deck with Reinforced Concrete ...................................................................................................... 1251
8.6.3.9 Prismatic Steel Warren (or Modified Warren) Truss or Pratt Truss, Both With or Without a Vierendeel Panel in the Middle (for the Main
Mechanical Duct) Shear Studded into Flat-Soffit Reinforced Concrete or (Parallel or Perpendicular Ribbed) Metal Deck with Reinforced Concrete....... 1258
8.6.3.10 Nonprismatic Tapered (Shallower at the Supports) Steel Plate Girder Shear Studded Into (Parallel or Perpendicular Ribbed) Metal Deck with
Reinforced Concrete............................................................................................................................................................................................................ 1258
8.6.4
ULS Composite Column Design ................................................................................................................................................1259
8.6.5
ULS Connection Design..............................................................................................................................................................1260
8.6.6
ULS Bearing and Joints Design .................................................................................................................................................1261
8.6.7
ULS Brittle Fracture Design ......................................................................................................................................................1262
8.6.8
ULS Fatigue Design ....................................................................................................................................................................1262
8.6.9
ULS Fire Protection Design .......................................................................................................................................................1263
8.6.10
SLS Human Induced Vibration ...............................................................................................................................................1265
8.6.11
SLS Deflection Criteria ............................................................................................................................................................1266
8.6.12
SLS Corrosion Protection ........................................................................................................................................................1268
8.7 STEEL DESIGN TO BS 5400-PART 3 (BRIDGES)..........................................................................................1270
8.8 TIMBER DESIGN TO EC5 .............................................................................................................................1271
8.8.1 ULS Beam and Column Design .................................................................................................................................................1273
8.8.2 ULS Dowel (Nailed, Screwed, Bolted, Doweled) Connection Design......................................................................................1274
8.8.3 ULS Fire Protection Design .......................................................................................................................................................1275
8.9 MASONRY DESIGN TO BS 5628 ...................................................................................................................1276
9 GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING...........................................................................................................1277
9.1 BASIC SOIL MECHANICS .............................................................................................................................1277

9.2 SLOPE STABILITY ANALYSIS .......................................................................................................................1284
9.3 EARTH PRESSURE ANALYSIS AND RETAINING WALL DESIGN .................................................................1288
9.4 FOUNDATION DESIGN ..................................................................................................................................1312
9.4.1 Scheme Design.............................................................................................................................................................................1312
9.4.2 Allowable Bearing Pressure .......................................................................................................................................................1316
9.4.3 Pad Footing .................................................................................................................................................................................1318
9.4.4 Strip Footing ...............................................................................................................................................................................1329
9.4.5 Raft Foundation ..........................................................................................................................................................................1330
9.4.6 Basement Foundation .................................................................................................................................................................1331
9.4.7 Piled Foundation.........................................................................................................................................................................1336
9.5 SETTLEMENT ANALYSIS ..............................................................................................................................1341
10 CONVERSION FACTORS.........................................................................................................................1348
BIBLIOGRAPHY.................................................................................................................................................1349
12
Second Edition
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
My humble gratitude to the Almighty, to Whom this and all work is dedicated.
A special thank you also to my teachers at Imperial College of Science, Technology and Medicine, London and my
fellow engineering colleagues at Ove Arup and Partners London and Ramboll Whitbybird London.
Engr Sreejit Raghu
13
Second Edition
LIST OF SYMBOLS AND NOTATIONS
Elemental Notations
{y} = displacement function

[N] = shape functions matrix
{f} = element forces in element axes including fixed end forces
{d} = element deformation in element axes
{b} = element body forces
[k] = element constitutive matrix
[m] = element mass matrix
[c] = element viscous damping matrix
{p} = element nodal loading vector
[T] = transformation matrix
W = work done by external loads
SDOF, MDOF and Modal Dynamic Equation of Motion Notations
m = SDOF mass
[M] = Global MDOF mass matrix
c = SDOF viscous damping constant
[C] = Global MDOF viscous damping matrix
k = SDOF stiffness
[K] = Global MDOF stiffness matrix
u = SDOF displacement
{u},{U}= Global MDOF displacement matrix
{P} = Global nodal loading vector
Mi, [M] = Modal (generalized) mass and modal (generalized) mass matrix
Ci, [C] = Modal (generalized) damping and modal (generalized) damping matrix
Ki, [K] = Modal (generalized) stiffness and modal (generalized) stiffness matrix
ξi, {ξi} = Modal displacement response and modal displacement response vector
SDOF Dynamic Notations
ωn = Natural circular frequency, (k/m)1/2

ωd = Damped natural circular frequency, ωn(1−ζ2)1/2
ω = Frequency of forcing function
c = Viscous damping constant
ccr = Critical viscous damping constant, 2(km)1/2 = 2mωn
ζ = Damping ratio (fraction of critical), c/ccr
δ = Logarithmic decrement
SDOF Free Vibrational Notations
G = Complex starting transient response function, G = GR + iGI
SDOF Time Domain Loading and Transient and Steady-State Response Notations
P(t) = Loading function

p0 = Force excitation amplitude
p0/k = Static displacement
D(t) = Dynamic amplification factor
14
Second Edition
Dmax = Maximum dynamic amplification factor

u(t) = Displacement response, D(t)(p0/k)
umax = Maximum displacement response, Dmax(p0/k)
Modal Time Domain Loading and Transient and Steady-State Notations
{P(t)} = Loading function vector

Pi(t) = Modal loading function, Pi(t) = {φi}T {P(t)}
p0i = Modal force excitation amplitude
p0i/Ki = Modal static displacement
Di (t) = Modal dynamic amplification factor
Di max = Modal maximum dynamic amplification factor
ξi(t) = Modal displacement response, ξi(t) = Di(t)p0i/Ki
ξi max = Modal maximum displacement response, ξi max = Di max p0i/Ki
{u(t)} = Displacement response vector, {u(t)} = [Φ]{ξ(t)}
SDOF Frequency Domain Loading and Steady-State Response Notations
P(t) = SDOF Time domain harmonic loading function, P(t) = Real [ P(ω)eiωt ]
P(ω) = SDOF frequency domain complex harmonic loading function
p0 = SDOF harmonic loading amplitude
p0/k = SDOF static displacement
D(ω) = SDOF (magnitude of the) dynamic amplification factor
Dresonant = SDOF (magnitude of the) dynamic amplification factor at resonance when ω = ωn
Dmax = SDOF maximum (magnitude of the) dynamic amplification factor when ω = ωn(1-2ζ2)1/2
F(ω) = SDOF complex displacement response function (FRF), F(ω) = D(ω)(p0/k)e−iθ
H(ω) = SDOF transfer function, H(ω) = D(ω)(1/k)e−iθ
Fresonant = SDOF complex displacement response function at resonance, Fresonant = Dresonant(p0/k)e−iθ
Fmax = SDOF complex maximum displacement response function, Fmax = Dmax(p0/k)e−iθ
u(t) = SDOF time domain displacement response, u(t) = Real [ F(ω)eiωt ]
uresonant = SDOF time domain displacement response at resonance, u(t) = Real [ Fresonant eiωt]
umax = SDOF time domain maximum displacement response, u(t) = Real [ Fmax eiωt]
Tr = SDOF transmissibility of displacement, acceleration or force
Modal Frequency Domain Loading and Steady-State Response Notations
{P(t)} = Time domain harmonic loading function vector, {P(t)} = Real [ {P(ω)} eiωt ]
{P(ω)} = Frequency domain complex harmonic loading function vector
Pi(ω) = Modal frequency domain complex harmonic loading function vector, Pi(ω) = {φi}T {P(ω)}
p0i = Modal harmonic loading amplitude
p0i/Ki = Modal static displacement
Di(ω) = Modal (magnitude of the) dynamic amplification factor
Di resonant = Modal (magnitude of the) dynamic amplification factor at resonance when ω = ωni
Di max = Modal maximum (magnitude of the) dynamic amplification factor when ω = ωni(1-2ζi2)1/2
ξi(ω) = Modal complex displacement response function (FRF), ξi(ω) = Di(ω)p0i/Ki e− iθi
ξi resonant = Modal complex displacement response function at resonance, ξi resonant = Di resonant p0i/Ki e− iθi
ξi max = Modal complex maximum displacement response function, ξi max = Di max p0i/Ki e−iθi
{u(t)} = Time domain displacement response vector, {u(t)} = Real [ [Φ]{ξ(ω)}eiωt ]
Additional Abbreviations
15
Second Edition
ML: Materially Linear

MNL: Materially Nonlinear
GL: Geometrically Linear
GNL: Geometrically Nonlinear
[] = matrix
{} = column vector
<> = row vector
16
Second Edition
1 INTRODUCTION
This paper serves as a guide to performing effective static and dynamic structural analyses with MSC.NASTRAN
in particular, although the concepts described herein are also equally applicable to other analysis codes.
A disbeliever wonders if the answer provided by a finite element analysis is correct. The question is not whether
the correct answer has been obtained, but rather if the correct question was asked, for the answer will always be
correct.
17
Second Edition
2 CONCEPTS OF COMPUTATIONAL FINITE ELEMENT STRUCTURAL ANALYSIS

2.1 Overview of the Finite Element Method
2.1.1 GL, ML Static Finite Element Elemental Formulation
The elemental stiffness formulation of the finite element describes the stiffness behavior of an element. The finite
element elemental stiffness formulation describes the force-displacement relationship of a finite number of degrees
of freedom of the element. This relationship can be formulated by one of two general methods as described below.
2.1.1.1 The Principle of Virtual Displacements of The Principle of Virtual Work (Equivalent to the
Variational Method or The Principle of Minimum Potential Energy)
The stiffness of a linear system is based on the stiffness at the initial undeformed state. Define state A as the initial
undeformed state. The variation of displacement within a finite element can be presented as a function of the matrix
of shape functions [N] and the discrete nodal degree of freedom displacement vector {d} as
{y} = [N]{d}
Vector {y} describes the general displacement function (interpolation function) within the finite element, {d} is the
unknown nodal DOFs and [N] are their corresponding shape functions.
The general strain vector {ε} in terms of {d} can then be derived as the strain is some derivative function of the
displacement function and hence the nodal DOFs {d}
{ε} = [BA]{d}
The general stress vector {σ} can then be established in terms of the strains and hence be expressed in terms of the
DOFs {d} amongst other terms
{σ} = [DA][BA]{d} + {σ}i − [DA]{ε}i
The second term is due to the initial stresses (such as residual stresses within the element) and the third term is the
initial strains due to temperature shrinkage or lack of fit.
Two equivalent fundamental theorems of structural analysis are the principle of virtual displacements
(virtual work) and the principle of minimum potential energy. These theorems provide the fundamental
Newton’s equilibrium equations for the finite element. The principle of virtual displacements (virtual work) states
that a structural system is in equilibrium in its deflected configuration if the external work performed by the applied
loading over any possible infinitesimal displacement mode is equal to the internal work performed by the
component forces over the corresponding compatible infinitesimal deformations. In other words, a system is in
equilibrium when the external work done equates the internal work. The equivalent principle of minimum potential
energy states that a structural system is in equilibrium in its deflected configuration if its total potential energy (V),
consisting of the system strain energy (U) and the loading potential energy (-W), is stationary with respect to any
infinitesimal variation in the possible deformation modes.
For a finite element, the equilibrium equation is thus derived by equating the external work to the internal energy
for a virtual displacement set.
(Virtual Nodal Disp) x (Real Nodal Forces) + (Virtual General Disp) x (Real Distributed Forces)
= (Virtual Strains Or Deformations) x (Real Stresses Or Actions)
18
Second Edition
δ{d} {f } + ∫ δ{y} {b}dΩ = ∫ δ{ε} {σ}dΩ

Τ Τ T
Ω Ω
where {f} is the nodal force vector and {b} is the distributed body forces within the finite element. We have
however established that
{y} = [ N ]{d} hence {y}T = {d}T [ N ]T

{ε} = [B A ]{d} hence {ε}T = {d}T [B A ]T
{σ} = [D A ][B A ]{d} + {σ}i − [D A ]{ε}i
hence
δ{d} {f } + ∫ δ{d} [ N] {b}dΩ = ∫ δ{d}T [ B A ] T {σ}i dΩ − δ{d}T [ B A ] T [ D A ]{ε}i dΩ

Τ Τ
δ{d}T [ B A ] T [ D A ][ B A ]{d}dΩ + ∫ ∫
T
Ω Ω Ω Ω
The above expression is valid for any virtual displacement δ{d}. Choosing unity virtual displacements we arrive at
the elemental equilibrium equations
[
{f } = ∫Ω [B A ]T [D A ][B A ]dΩ {d} +] {∫ [B Ω
] {σ}i dΩ −
A T
} {∫ [B
Ω
A T
] [D A ]{ε}i dΩ −} {∫ [N] {b}dΩ}
Ω
Τ
This is the expression that is set up for each and every element. If the nodal force vector {f} is known, then the only
remaining unknown within these equations are the nodal displacement vector {d}. Note that we have defined [B]
the strain matrix, {σ}i = the initial stresses, [D] the material constitutive matrix, {ε}i = the initial strains, [N] =
shape functions matrix, {b} = the elemental (external) body loads and of course {d} = nodal element displacement
in element axes.
To summarize the terms in the above elemental static equilibrium equation expression
(i) the term on the LHS is the nodal force vector in element axis
(ii) the first term on the RHS is the instantaneous stiffness matrix
(iii) the second, third and fourth terms on the RHS are the so-called fixed end forces
We note that the choice of the shape functions [N] affects the accuracy of
(i) the elemental instantaneous stiffness matrix

(ii) the fixed end forces
The important concept to grasp is that geometrically linear (GL) finite elements have linear strain-displacement
relationships i.e. the [BA] matrix would be constant and thus independent of the nodal displacements {d}.
Materially linear (ML) finite elements have linear stress-strain relationships i.e. the [DA] matrix would be constant
and thus independent of the strain vector {ε}.
19
Second Edition
2.1.1.2 The Method of Weighted Residuals
We have seen that the principle of virtual displacements or the principle of minimum potential energy (variational
approach) can be used to establish the element stiffness matrix. The shape function [N] is applied to the variational
statement in the discretization.
Another method of establishing the elemental stiffness matrix is the method of weighted residuals. Here, instead of
applying the shape functions [N] to the variational statement, it is applied to the so-called weak statement. The
weak statement is a perfectly equivalent integral form of the strong statement which is the governing Newton’s
differential equation representing the equilibrium of the element internal and external forces. The weak statement of
a differential equation (strong statement) can be stated as
∫ v(Differential Equation )dΩ + v(Natural Boundary Conditions of the Differential Equation) = 0

Ω
for any function of v and v.
The weak statement is perfectly equivalent to the strong statement. The shape function [N] is applied to the
differential equation. Any shape function [N] that satisfies the strong statement also satisfies the weak statement.
The functions v and v are the weighting function for the error in the differential equation and the natural boundary
conditions respectively. The weak statement is perfectly equivalent to the strong statement if the weak statement is
satisfied for any weighting functions whatsoever. In words, the weak statement states that the residual errors in the
approximation of the original differential equation and the natural boundary condition weighted by the weighting
functions are zero, hence the name weighted residual methods. This does not mean that the error in the strong
statement is zero, as there will still be approximations in the shape functions [N]. On top of that, usually, the weak
statement will not be satisfied for all weighting functions. The choice of the finite weighting functions define the
various different methods of weighted residuals.
Two common methods within the method of weighted residuals are the sub-domain collocation method and the
popular Galerkin method (which is equivalent to the variational approach). The sub-domain collocation method
divides the geometric domain into as many sub-domains as there are DOFs with the weighting functions having a
value of unity in a particular sub-domain and zero in all other sub-domains leading to one equation from the weak
statement. The weighting functions are also put to unity at other sub-domains in turn, leading to a set of
simultaneous equations which formulate the elemental stiffness matrix.
In the Galerkin approach, the weighting functions are identical to the shape functions. Since there are as many
shape functions as there as DOFs, each shape function is applied to the weak statement for an equation. This leads
to a set of simultaneous equations which formulate the elemental stiffness matrix. The Galerkin approach is
actually exactly equivalent to the variational approach.
20
Second Edition
2.1.2 GL, ML Static Finite Element Global Formulation
The following describes the assembly of the element stiffness matrices towards the formulation of the global
system stiffness matrix by the use of the equilibrium, compatibility and constitutive laws. We have shown that the
elemental equilibrium equations are
[ ] {∫ [B ] {σ} dΩ}− {∫ [B ] [D ]{ε} dΩ}− {∫ [N] {b}dΩ}

{f } = ∫Ω [B A ]T [D A ][B A ]dΩ {d} + Ω
A T
i
Ω
A T A
i
Ω
Τ
[ ]
= k AE {d} + {∫ [B
Ω
] {σ} dΩ}− {∫ [B ] [ D ]{ε} dΩ}− {∫ [ N ] {b} dΩ}
A T
i
Ω
A T A
i
Ω
Τ
Inherent within this expression is the material constitutive law. This expression is computed for each and every
element in the element axes system. These contributions make up the nodal equilibrium equations at each and every
node. In order to assemble that, we again employ the principle of virtual displacements
δW = δ{d} {f } (for all δ{U})

T
 ∂W   ∂{d} 
T
 =  {f }
 ∂{U}  ∂ U 
{P} = [T]T {f }
or the principle of minimum potential energy
Total Potential Energy, V = U + (− W)

δV = δU − δW = 0 (for all δ{U})
U= {d} [k ]{d}
1 T
(for linear elastic material)
2
δU = δ{d} [k ]{d} = δ{d} {f }
T T
δV = δ{d}T {f } − δW = {0}
 ∂V   ∂{d} 
T
For equilibrium,  =  {f } −  ∂W  = {0}

 ∂{U}  ∂ U   ∂{U}
 ∂W   ∂{d} 
T
 =  {f }
 ∂{U}  ∂ U 
{P} = [T ] T {f }
Both theorems result in the nodal equilibrium equations
{P} = [TA]T{f}
where {P} is the nodal external force vector in global axes system, {f} is the elemental nodal force vector in the
element axes system and [T] is the transformation matrix. The vector {P} is thus the user-specified external loads
which are known. The transformation matrix [T] transforms the elemental contribution to the static equilibrium
equations such that compatibility is ensured. Also note that the displacement DOFs need also be transformed to
ensure compatibility
{d} = [TA]{U}
21
Second Edition
We thus obtain the nodal static equilibrium equations in the global axes system
{P} = [T A ] T {f }
= [T A ] T {[∫ [B
Ω
]
{∫ [B ] {σ} dΩ}− {∫ [B ] [D ]{ε} dΩ}− {∫ [N] {b}dΩ}
] [D A ][B A ]dΩ [T A ]{U} +
A T
Ω
A T
i
Ω
A T A
i
Ω
Τ
= [T ] [k ][T ]{U} + [T ] {∫ [B ] {σ} dΩ}− [T ] {∫ [B ] [D ]{ε} dΩ}− [T ] {∫ [ N] {b} dΩ}

A T A
E
A A T A T
i
A T A T A
i
A T Τ
Ω Ω Ω
= [K ]{U} + [T ] {∫ [B ] {σ} dΩ}− [T ] {∫ [B ] [D ]{ε} dΩ}− [T ] {∫ [ N] {b} dΩ}

A
E
A T A T
i
A T A T A
i
A T Τ
Ω Ω Ω
[ ] [ ]
as K AE = [T A ] T k AE [T A ]
The first term on the RHS in the nodal static equilibrium equation expression is the global instantaneous stiffness
matrix. The second, third and fourth on the RHS are the fixed end forces in the global axes system. Note that the
only unknowns in this expression are the global nodal displacement DOFs {U}. Hence in a linear static solutions
scheme, this expression is solved for {U} after the essential boundary conditions are applied using a simultaneous
equation solving algorithm such as Gaussian Elimination.
The stiffness matrix prior to application of the essential boundary conditions is known as the initial stiffness matrix
whilst that after the application of the essential boundary conditions is known as the final stiffness matrix. The
essential boundary conditions may be zero (constraints) or non-zero (settlement or enforced displacement).
Applying zero essential boundary condition effectively refers to deleting both the row and column associated with
the constrained DOF. Applying a non-zero (settlement) essential boundary condition refers to deleting the row
but not the columns associated with the DOF with the settlement. The deletion of the row indicates that the
additional equation defining the DOF as an unknown is not utilized within the simultaneous solver. And by not
deleting the column, the remaining equations utilize the known displacement value, which becomes a part of the
fixed end forces when the term is brought over the loading side of the equations. Hence the specification of the
enforced displacement always requires the specification of a constraint to delete the row (SPC entry in
MSC.NASTRAN) and the specification of an enforced displacement to account for the known displacement value
for the column (SPCD entry in MSC.NASTRAN). For example if the following is the initial stiffness matrix where
f now denotes the fixed end forces
 P1   f 1   K 11 K 12 K 13 K 14   U 1 
 P  f   K K 24   U 2 
 2   2   21 K 22 K 23
 − =  
 P3  f 3   K 31 K 32 K 33 K 34   U 3 
P4  f 4   K 41 
K 42 K 43 K 44   U 4 
and if the displacement U1 is a settlement or an enforced displacement, and U2 is a constraint, then the final
stiffness matrix
 P1   f 1   K 11 K 12 K 13 K 14   U 1 
 P  f   K K 24   U 2 
 2   2   21 K 22 K 23
 − =  
 P3  f 3   K 31 K 32 K 33 K 34   U 3 
P4  f 4   K 41 
K 42 K 43 K 44   U 4 
giving
 P3  f 3  K 31 U 1   K 33 K 34   U 3 
 − − =  
P4  f 4  K 41 U 1   K 43 K 44   U 4 
22
Second Edition
Notice the settlements now contribute to the fixed end forces. This expression is solved simultaneously for the
unknown displacements U3 and U4. Solving these final stiffness static equilibrium equations simultaneously then,
effectively produces the deformed configuration of the structure.
Finally, element stress recovery is performed utilizing
{σ} = [DA][BA]{d} + {σ}i − [DA]{ε}i
The reactions (obtained for both zero and non-zero essential boundary conditions) are obtained from the deleted
rows of the initial stiffness matrix. For the above example, the reactions P1 (at the settlement) and P2 (at the zero
constraint) are
 U1 
 P1   f 1   K 11 K 12 K 13 K 14   U 2 
 − =  
P2  f 2   K 21 K 22 K 23 K 24   U 3 
 U 4 
The reaction at the enforced displacement constrained should be checked after an analysis to ensure that the forces
required to effect this displacement are realistic.
Note that a static analysis can be solved with solely applied displacements, i.e. loads are not mandatory, as long as
the 6 rigid-body modes are constrained.
Again, it is important to grasp the concept that in geometrically linear (GL) global element stiffness formulations,
the transformation matrix [TA] is constant and thus independent of the global displacement vector {U}.
23
Second Edition
2.1.3 GNL, MNL Static Finite Element Elemental Formulation
The variation of displacement within a finite element can be presented as a function of the matrix of shape
functions [N] and the discrete nodal degree of freedom displacement vector {d} as
{y} = [N]{d}
Vector {y} describes the general displacement function (interpolation function) within the finite element, {d} is the
unknown nodal DOFs and [N] are their corresponding shape functions.
The general strain vector {ε} in terms of {d} can then be derived as the strain is some derivative function of the
displacement function and hence the nodal DOFs {d}
{ε} = [B]{d}
One of the differences with a nonlinear finite element stiffness formulation lies in the elemental strain expression
{ε} which is no longer linearly related to the nodal displacement DOFs {d}. Hence the strain matrix [B] is no
longer constant but instead a function of the nodal displacement vector {d}. This has further repercussions that will
become apparent.
The general stress vector {σ} can then be established in terms of the strains and hence be expressed in terms of the
DOFs {d} amongst other terms
{σ} = [D][B]{d} + {σ}i − [D]{ε}i
The second term is due to the initial stresses (such as residual stresses within the element) and the third term is the
initial strains due to temperature shrinkage or lack of fit. For material nonlinearity, the constitutive matrix [D] is
also dependent upon the strains {ε} which in turn is dependent upon the nodal displacement vector {d}.
For a variational finite element, the equilibrium equation is thus derived by equating the external work to the
internal energy for a virtual displacement set or by minimizing the total potential energy (note that these theorems
are equally applicable for nonlinear systems as they are for linear systems)
V=U−W
δV = δU − δW = 0 for equilibrium
∫ δ{ε} {σ}dΩ − δ{d} {f } − ∫ δ{y} {b}dΩ = 0

Τ Τ
δV =
T
Ω Ω
where {f} is the nodal force vector and {b} is the distributed body forces within the finite element. We have
however established that
{y} = [ N ]{d} hence {y}T = {d}T [ N ]T
{ε} = [B]{d} hence {ε}T = {d}T [B] T
{σ} = [D][B]{d} + {σ}i − [D]{ε}i
hence
δ{d} {f } + ∫ δ{d} [ N] {b}dΩ = ∫ δ{d}T [ B] T {σ}i dΩ − δ{d}T [ B] T [ D]{ε}i dΩ

Τ Τ
δ{d}T [ B] T [ D][B]{d}dΩ + ∫ ∫
T
Ω Ω Ω Ω
The above expression is valid for any virtual displacement δ{d}. Choosing unity virtual displacements we arrive at
the elemental equilibrium equations
[
{f } = ∫Ω [B]T [D][B]dΩ {d} + ] {∫ [B] {σ} dΩ}− {∫ [B] [D]{ε} dΩ}− {∫ [N] {b}dΩ}
Ω
T
i
Ω
T
i
Ω
Τ
24
Second Edition
This is the expression that is set up for each and every element. If the nodal force vector {f} is known, then the only
remaining unknown within these equations are the nodal displacement vector {d}. Note that we have defined [B]
the strain matrix, {σ}i = the initial stresses, [D] the material constitutive matrix, {ε}i = the initial strains, [N] =
shape functions matrix, {b} = the elemental (external) body loads and of course {d} = nodal element displacement
in element axes.
To summarize the terms in the above elemental static equilibrium equation expression
(i) the term on the LHS is the nodal force vector in element axis
(ii) the first term on the RHS is the instantaneous stiffness matrix
(iii) the second, third and fourth terms on the RHS are the so-called fixed end forces
We note that the choice of the shape functions [N] affects the accuracy of
(i) the elemental instantaneous stiffness matrix

(ii) the fixed end forces
This elemental static equilibrium expression seems exactly identical to that of the linear finite element. However,
there are inherent fundamental differences that must be realized, i.e.
(i) Firstly, the strain matrix [B] is no longer constant but instead dependent upon the nodal displacement
vector {d}, this being a characteristic of geometric nonlinearity.
(ii) Secondly, the constitutive matrix [D] is not constant but instead dependent upon the nodal
displacement vector {d}, this being a characteristic of material nonlinearity.
(iii) Thirdly, the body loading vector {b} is also dependent upon the nodal displacement vector {d}, this
also being a characteristic of geometric nonlinearity
An extremely fundamental concept to grasp is that as a result of the dependence of [B], [D] and {b} on {d}, we can
no longer solve for {d} using linear simultaneous equation solving algorithms. In the linear systems, we write the
expression
{f} = [kE]{d} + Fixed End Forces
and provided we know the applied nodal forces {f}, which we do, we can solve for {d} as the fixed end forces are
independent of {d}. Now, in the nonlinear system, the equilibrium equations are nonlinear. We thus employ
another technique based on the tangent stiffness in order to solve the nonlinear equilibrium equations for {d}.
The stiffness matrix of the nonlinear system is no longer constant. By definition the stiffness of the system is
[k ] =  ∂{f } 
 
 ∂ d 
For a linear finite element, since [B], [D] and {b} are independent of {d}, the second, third and fourth terms in the
elemental equilibrium equation does not feature in the stiffness expression which simply is
[k ] = [∫ [B] [D][B]dΩ]
Ω
T
On the other hand, for a nonlinear finite element, there are remaining terms when the second, third and fourth terms
of the elemental equilibrium equation are differentiated with respect to {d} to obtain the elemental tangent stiffness
expression as shown below.
25
Second Edition
 ∂2V 
[k T ] =  
 ∂{d}∂ d 
 ∂2U   ∂2W 
= − 
 ∂{d}∂ d   ∂{d}∂ d 
 ∂{ε} 
 ∂
= { }
  ∂2W
[B] T {σ}  − 

 as [B] =  
 ∂ d   ∂{d}∂ d   ∂ d 
T  ∂{σ}  ∂[B]T   2 
= [B]  + {σ} −  ∂ W  using the derivative of product rule
 ∂ d   ∂ d   ∂{d}∂ d 
T  ∂{σ}  ∂{ε}   ∂[B]T   2 
= [B]   + {σ} −  ∂ W  using the chain rule
 ∂ ε   ∂ d   ∂ d   ∂{d}∂ d 
 ∂[B]T   2   ∂{σ}  ∂{ε} 
= [B] [D][B] + 
T
{σ} −  ∂ W  as [D] =   and [B] =  
 ∂ d   ∂{d}∂ d   ∂ ε   ∂ d 
 ∂  ∂{ε}  T   ∂ 2 W   ∂{ε} 
= [B] [D][B] +   {σ} −   as [B] = 
T
 
 ∂ d  ∂ d    ∂{d}∂ d   ∂ d 
 
 ∂ ε
2
  2 
= [B]T [D][B] +  {σ} −  ∂ W 
 ∂{d}∂ d   ∂{d}∂ d 
Hence, we can conclude that the elemental tangent stiffness matrix is
[k T ] = [k E ] + [k G ]
[k E ] = ∫ [B]T [D][B]dΩ
Ω
 ∂2 ε   ∂ 2 Wi   ∂ 2 Wn 
[k G ] = ∫  {{σ}n + {σ}i − [D]{ε}i }dΩ −   − λ  

Ω
∂{d}∂ d   ∂{d}∂ d   ∂{d}∂ d 
{σ} n = [D][B]{d}
It is apparent now that the stiffness of the nonlinear finite element (and by stiffness we mean the variation of
resistance {f} with respect to the nodal displacement {d}) is not just dependent upon the instantaneous stiffness
[kE] but also includes second order internal strain energy and external work terms so-called the differential
stiffness terms due to the initial and nominal stresses within the finite element and the initial and nominal external
work done on the element.
To summarize, the primary differences with the nonlinear static stiffness formulation are
(i) the elemental strain {ε} have higher order (than linear) terms of the displacement DOFs {d} and
hence the strain matrix [B] is no longer constant but instead dependent upon the nodal displacement
vector {d}, this being a characteristic of geometric nonlinearity. Hence, firstly, the [B] term within
[kE] is dependent upon the state of deflections {d} instead of being constant with respect to {d}, and
secondly, the second derivative of the strain {ε} with respect to {d} is not zero thus causing the
addition of a geometric stiffness that is also a function of the prestress.
26
Second Edition
(ii) the constitutive matrix [D] is not constant but instead dependent upon the nodal displacement vector
{d}, this being a characteristic of material nonlinearity.
(iii) the elemental loading vector {b} has higher order (than linear) terms of the displacement DOFs {d},
this also being a characteristic of geometric nonlinearity.
These differences produce stiffness terms that are not constant (or independent) with respect to {d} but instead
dependent upon {d}. The nonlinearity of the stiffness expression thus requires the evaluation of an appropriately
called tangent stiffness matrix.
Elements with GNL capabilities have thus the following additional capabilities: -
(i) The instantaneous stiffness matrix [kE] is dependent upon the deflected configuration. This is
because the strain-displacement relationship is nonlinear i.e. [B] would be a function of {d}.
Elements with the capability of nonlinear [B] matrices are termed large strain elements.
(ii) The geometric (or differential) stiffness matrix is dependent upon the state of stresses (or forces for
one-dimensional finite elements) as depicted by the {σn+σi+Dεi} term where {σi} is the initial
prestress and {εi} is the initial strain. Elements that are capable of modelling this effect are termed
large strain elements.
(iii) The geometric (or differential) stiffness matrix is dependent upon the second order variation of
initial and nominal work done with respect to the local element DOFs. There will be no
contribution from these terms if the applied external forces are work-conjugate with the element
DOFs. By work-conjugate, we mean that these second-order work terms will produce equivalent
nodal loading which are always in the direction of the local element nodal displacement DOFs {d}.
GNL elements capable of modelling the ‘follower force effect’ where the force direction is
dependent upon the deflected shape would make contributions to these terms as the equivalent
nodal force contributions are then not work-conjugate.
Elements with MNL capabilities have the following additional capabilities: -
(i) The stress-strain relationships is nonlinear i.e. [D] would be a function of {ε} which in turn is a
function of the nodal displacement vector {d}
These GNL, MNL elements reduce to GL, ML elements if [B], [D] and {b} are constant in which case the stiffness
matrix will not be dependent upon the state of stress (or forces for one-dimensional finite elements) or the second
order work variation. The stiffness matrix then corresponds to that of the instantaneous stiffness matrix at the initial
undeflected configuration state, A.
GNL, MNL elements

[f ] = [k T ]{d} but cannot be solved by linear simultaneous equation solving algorithms
[k T ] = [k E ] + [k G ]
[k E ] = ∫ [B]T [D][B]dΩ
Ω
 ∂2 ε   ∂ 2 Wi   ∂ 2 Wn 
[k G ] = ∫  {{σ}n + {σ}i − [D]{ε}i }dΩ −   − λ  

Ω
∂{d}∂ d   ∂{d}∂ d   ∂{d}∂ d 
{σ}n = [D][B]{d}
GL, ML elements
[ ]
[f ] = k AE {d}
 
[f ] =  ∫ [B ] [D][B ]dΩ {d}
A T A
can be solved by linear simultaneous equation solving algorithms
Ω 
27
Second Edition
In conclusion, nonlinear finite elements have the following additional capabilities
(i) Large strain effect – Non constant instantaneous stiffness due to non-constant [B] and the effect of
the geometric stiffness due to prestress and prestrain and nominal stress
(ii) The follower-force effect
(iii) Nonlinear stress-strain behavior
It is imperative to realize that the nonlinearity of [B] and the prominence of the element [kG] matrix both reduce
when the element length L (or other dimensions for two and three dimensional finite elements) reduces. This brings
us to a very important conclusion, i.e. that GL elements (small strain elements) can be used to approximate GNL
element (large strain element or hyperelastic elements) force-displacement response if a sufficient number of
elements are utilized to model a single structural member. This however does not mean that a GL analysis solution
scheme can be employed, instead a GNL solution technique must be used as the nonlinearities are accounted for in
the global behaviour and not the local element behaviour.
28
Second Edition
2.1.4 GNL, MNL Static Finite Element Global Formulation
The following describes the assembly of the element stiffness matrices towards the formulation of the global
system stiffness matrix by the use of the equilibrium, compatibility and constitutive laws. We have shown that the
elemental equilibrium equations are
[ ]
{f } = ∫Ω [B]T [D][B]dΩ {d} + {∫Ω [B]T {σ}i dΩ}− {∫Ω [B]T [D]{ε}i dΩ}− {∫Ω [ N]Τ {b} dΩ}
Inherent within this expression is the material constitutive law. This expression is computed for each and every
element in the element axes system. These contributions make up the nodal equilibrium equations at each and every
node. In order to assemble that, we again employ the principle of minimum potential energy
Total potential energy V=U−W

 ∂V 
For equilibrium   = {0}
 ∂{U}
 ∂U   ∂W 
 −  = {0}
 ∂{U}  ∂{U}
 ∂{d} 
T
 ∂W 
  {f } −   = {0}
 ∂ U   ∂{U}
[T ]T {f } −  ∂W  = {0} as [T] =  ∂{d} 

 
 ∂{U}  ∂ U 
[T ]T {f } = {P}
Replacing the elemental contributions to the nodal equilibrium equations, we can assemble the nodal static
equilibrium equation, which can be written in its full glory
{P} = [T ]
T
{[∫ [B] [D][B]dΩ][T]{U} + {∫ [B] {σ} dΩ}− {∫ [B] [D]{ε} dΩ}− {∫ [N] {b}dΩ}}
Ω
T
Ω
T
i
Ω
T
i
Ω
Τ
Note that [T] is the transformation matrix between the element DOF system {d} to the global DOF system {U}.
This transformation matrix is dependent upon the global system parameters {U}. The local element axes system
changes with respect to the global element axes as it is dependent upon the position of the DOFs in the deflected
configuration, a so-called Eulerian system.
The equilibrium equations cannot be solved using a linear solution algorithm, as they are a set of nonlinear
equations, nonlinearly related to {U}, which are the only unknowns. Of course a nonlinear simultaneous algorithm
could in theory be applied, but this usually proves to be too computationally demanding, and inefficient. Hence,
solutions schemes almost always utilize the tangent stiffness matrix approach. The tangent stiffness is independent
of the unknowns {U}. Hence, for a small load or displacement step, the response of system can be approximated to
be linear with respect to {U}. In other words, for a small load or displacement step, the response of the system will
be linear and hence a linear simultaneous solution algorithm may be employed if the solution scheme is implicit.
Knowing the tangent stiffness matrix, we can write that for a small change in {U} (small displacement step) or for
a small change in {P} that
δ{P} = [KT] δ{U}
This is a linear relationship for the nonlinear problem. Hence, any solution scheme (static or dynamic) that
incorporates the variation of stiffness with deformation {U} i.e. nonlinear stiffnesses requires a stepping algorithm
in order to change the value of the tangent stiffness as the solution progresses. This is required as from the equation
29
Second Edition
above, it is apparent that a particular linear equilibrium equation that represents the nonlinear problem is valid only
for a small load or displacement step. For completion, it is worth mentioning that when δ{P} is zero for a certain
small δ{U}, this means that [KT] is zero. Physically, this means that the system is at an unstable equilibrium state,
i.e. it is on the brink of buckling.
The expression for the tangent stiffness matrix in the global system will now be presented. We know from the
principle of minimum potential energy that a system is in equilibrium when the first order derivative of the total
potential energy with respect to {U} is zero. The tangent stiffness of the system is the second order derivative of
the total potential energy function with respect to {U}, i.e.
 ∂2V 
[K T ] =  
 ∂{U}∂ U 
 ∂2U   ∂2W 
= − 
 ∂{U}∂ U   ∂{U}∂ U 
 ∂2U   ∂{P}   ∂W 
= −  as {P} =  
 ∂{U}∂ U   ∂ U   ∂{U}
But loads applied at nodes within a commercial finite element program are always in the direction of the global
system throughout the analysis. This means that the nodal loading is work-conjugate with the global displacement
vector {U} and thus there will be no second order variation in work. Thus the second term in the above expression
is zero. Note that the second order variation of work terms due to loading within the finite elements is taken into
account within the elemental formulations as described earlier. We thus arrive at
 ∂2U 
[K T ] =  
 ∂{U}∂ U 
which states that the tangent stiffness matrix is equal to the second order variation of internal strain energy.
Performing some basic calculus
 ∂{d} 
 ∂
[K T ] =  { 
[T]T {f }  } as [T ] =  
 ∂ U   ∂ U 
 ∂{f }   ∂[T ]T 
= [T ]T  + {f } using the derivative of product rule
 ∂ U   ∂ U 
T  ∂{f }   ∂{d}   ∂[T ]T 
= [T ]   + {f } using the chain rule
 ∂ d   ∂ U   ∂ U 
 ∂[T ]T   ∂{f }   ∂{d} 
= [T ] [k T ][T ] +  {f } as [k T ] =   and [T] = 
T

 ∂ U   ∂ d   ∂ U 
 ∂  ∂{d}  T   ∂{d} 
= [T ] [k T ][T ] +   {f } as [T ] = 
T
 
 ∂ U  ∂ U    ∂ U 
 
 ∂ d
2

= [T ] [k T ][T ] +  {f }
T
 ∂{U}∂ U 
30
Second Edition
To summarize global tangent stiffness matrix replacing terms from the elemental tangent stiffness matrix
 ∂2 d 
From above [K T ] = [T ]T [k T ][T] +  {f }
 ∂{U}∂ U 
but [ ] {
{f } = ∫Ω [B]T [D][B]dΩ {d} + ∫Ω [B]T {σ}i dΩ }− {∫ [B] [D]{ε} dΩ}− {∫ [N] {b}dΩ}
Ω
T
i
Ω
Τ
and [k T ] = [k E ] + [k G ]
where [k E ] = ∫ [B] [D][B]dΩ
T
 ∂2 ε   ∂ 2 Wi   ∂ 2 Wn 
and [k G ] = ∫  {{σ}n
+ {σ}i − [D]{ε}i }dΩ −   − λ 
 ∂{d}∂ d
Ω   ∂{d}∂ d   ∂{d}∂ d 
for which {σ} n = [D][B]{d}
Thus [K T ] = [K E ] + [K G ]
where [K E ] = [T ] [[k E ]][T ]
T
for which [k E ] = ∫ [B]T [D][B]dΩ

Ω
 ∂2 d 
and [K G ] = [T]T [[k G ]][T] +  {f }
 ∂{U}∂ U 
 ∂2 ε   ∂ 2 Wi   ∂ 2 Wn 
for which [k G ] = ∫  {{σ}n + {σ}i − [ D]{ε}i }dΩ −   − λ 
Ω
 ∂{d}∂ d   ∂{d}∂ d   ∂{d}∂ d 
and {σ}n = [D][B]{d}
and [
Ω
T
i
Ω
T
i
Ω
Τ
Note that we have omitted the second order variation of work due to the external nodal loadings {P} from the
above tangent stiffness matrix expression, i.e.
 ∂2W   ∂{P}   ∂W 
−  = −  as {P} =  
 ∂{U}∂ U   ∂ U   ∂{U}
This is because, as mentioned, the externally applied loads at the nodes are in commercial codes always work-
conjugate with the nodal DOFs {U}, failing which the above term must be incorporated. The second order variation
of work due to loads applied on the finite elements is obviously still taken into account, namely in the terms
 ∂ 2 Wi   ∂ 2 Wn 
−  − λ 
 ∂{d}∂ d   ∂{d}∂ d 
Finally, the second-order work contribution of these elemental loadings to the internal energy of the global
formulation is
 ∂2 d
−
 ∂{U}∂ U
{∫ [N] {b}dΩ}
Ω
Τ
31
Second Edition
2.1.5 How Nonlinear Analysis Varies From Linear Analysis
2.1.5.1 Geometric Nonlinearity
Geometric nonlinearity can be broken down into just four component, firstly nonlinearity due to the
prominence of HIGHER ORDER ELEMENT STRAIN TERMS when local element deflections become
large, secondly nonlinearity due to HIGHER ORDER WORK TERMS (FOLLOWER FORCE EFFECT)
when global deflections become large, thirdly nonlinearity of the LOCAL TO GLOBAL
TRANSFORMATION MATRIX when global deflections become large and fourthly the nonlinearity in the
form of the global geometric stiffness matrix due to global PRESTRESS and large global displacements.
I. HIGHER ORDER ELEMENT STRAIN TERMS. Higher order element strain terms have two effects
upon the tangent stiffness matrix. Firstly, the local element instantaneous stiffness matrix [kE] becomes
dependent upon the local element deflected configuration and not the undeflected configuration.
[k E ] = ∫ [B]T [D ][B]dΩ
Ω
This is because the strain-displacement relationship is nonlinear i.e. [B] would be a function of {d} instead
of being constant and corresponding to the initial undeflected state [BA] as in a linear analysis. If {d} is
large, higher order terms in the strain-deflection {ε}=[B]{d} relationships become significant. Elemental
small displacement theory does not produce correct results. This occurs because the inherent instantaneous
stiffness of a structural element changes as its dimensions change as the analysis progresses. Elements with
the capability of nonlinear [B] matrices are termed large strain or hyperelastic elements. In large strains
elements, the strain matrix [B] varies with deflection {d}. Large strain effect occurs in metal forming,
rubber and elastomer applications. The material could be elastic with linear [D] but still it may
accommodate large strains within its elastic range, the higher order strains affecting its stiffness. Secondly,
higher order element strain terms cause nonlinearity of the local element tangent stiffness with respect to
local element deflections in the form of the element geometric stiffness due to prestress. In linear analysis,
elemental [kG] is not accounted for.
 ∂2 ε 
[k G ] = 
∫ {{σ}n + {σ}i − [D]{ε}i }dΩ
 ∂{d}∂ d
Ω 
where {ε} = [B]{d}
{σ}n = [D][B]{d}
An important observation is that the nonlinearity of [B] and the prominence of the element [kG] matrix both
reduce when the element length L (or other dimensions for two and three dimensional finite elements)
reduces. This brings us to a very important conclusion, i.e. that GL elements (small strain elements) can be
used to approximate GNL element (large strain element or hyperelastic elements) force-displacement
response if a sufficient number of elements are utilized to model a single structural member. The smaller
dimensions of the small strain finite elements ensure that they are not distorted too much ensuring that the
internal strains are not too large so as to invalidate the linear [B] relationship. It is perfectly valid to allow
the small strain elements to undergo large total deformation as in rigid body motion, however its relative
deformation must be small for its linear [B] relationship to be valid. The nonlinearity of the system is then
accounted for in the global behaviour within the GNL solution technique and not the local element
behaviour.
II. HIGHER ORDER WORK TERMS (FOLLOWER FORCE EFFECT). The follower force effect is the
nonlinearity of the tangent stiffness with respect to deflections in the form of the geometric stiffness due to
external forces, also known as the follower force effect. The geometric (or differential) stiffness matrix is
dependent upon the second order variation of work done with respect to the local and global DOFs. The
stiffness of the structure is dependent upon the magnitude and direction of the external element loads,
32
Second Edition
which again is dependent upon the current deflected configuration. This occurs when the applied force
depends on the deformation (so-called follower force) in the case of hydrostatic loads on submerged or
container structures, aerodynamic and hydrodynamic loads caused by the motion of aeriform and
hydroform fluids (wind loads, wave loads, drag forces). Element loads often tend to follow the normal to
the surface of the element. In linear analysis, these terms are not included.
 ∂ 2 Wi
−
 ∂{d}∂ d
  ∂ 2 Wn
 − λ
  ∂{d}∂ d
  ∂2 d
 = −
  ∂{U}∂ U
{∫ [N] {b}dΩ}
Ω
Τ

Nodal forces and accelerations are always in the direction of freedoms and hence are work conjugate and
hence linear analysis is sufficient to model these. Hence, there will be no contribution from these terms if
the applied external forces are work-conjugate with the element or global DOFs. GNL elements capable of
modelling the ‘follower force effect’ where the force direction is dependent upon the deflected shape would
make contributions to these terms as the force is then not work-conjugate.
 ∂2W   ∂{P}   ∂W 
−  = −  as {P} =  
 ∂{U}∂ U   ∂ U   ∂{U}
In linear analysis, these terms are not included.
III. PRESTRESS. This is nonlinearity in the form of the global geometric stiffness matrix due to global
PRESTRESS and large global displacements.
 ∂2 d 
 {f }
 ∂{U}∂ U 
where [ ]
{f } = ∫Ω [B]T [D][B]dΩ {d} + {∫Ω [B] T {σ}i dΩ}− {∫Ω [B]T [D]{ε}i dΩ}− {∫Ω [ N]Τ {b} dΩ}
Geometric stiffening or destiffening is due to element stress, prestress and prestrain. There is a contribution
to the geometric (or differential) stiffness matrix from the fact that an element would have internal stresses
and forces. The stiffness of the structure is dependent upon the current magnitude and nature of the internal
force actions within the structural element that is dependent upon the current deflected configuration. A
tensile load within a structural element increases the stiffness (increasing its natural frequency) as it tends
to return the element to its undeflected shape whilst a compressive load decreases the stiffness (decreasing
its natural frequency) as it tends to amplify the deflected shape. Hence the high bending stiffness in
prestressed cables where an unstressed cable will have negligible bending stiffness. Likewise is the
reduction in stiffness in a compressed column. Also, the gradual prestressing of a structural element such as
a thin plate that is restrained from longitudinal contraction and subject to bending causing the neutral
surface to stretch and generate significant tensile stresses, which serve to stiffen the plate in bending due to
the geometric stiffness. Of course, if the plate is not restrained, there will simply be longitudinal
contraction and no in plane stress will be generated, a linear analysis is then often sufficient. Clearly, this
longitudinal contraction when there are no restraints or the generation of in plane forces due to transverse
bending when there are restraints, is only observed in a nonlinear analysis, not a linear one. Hence, if there
is an element prestress {σi} or if the deflections {d} or {U} is sufficiently large to make the change in
element stress {σn} prominent in affecting the stiffness as the analysis progresses, the geometric (or
differential) stiffness matrix should be accounted for. In linear analysis, these terms are not included unless
special techniques such as P-∆ analyses are performed.
IV. LOCAL TO GLOBAL TRANSFORMATION MATRIX. This is the nonlinearity of the transformation
matrix [T] with respect to deflections {U}. If the deflections (U) are large, then it is appropriate to account
for the variation of the [T] matrix with {U}. Even if the elemental strains are small (which can be the case
if the finite element mesh is very fine), if the global deflections {U} are large, it is prudent to employ a
nonlinear solution scheme.
33
Second Edition
[T] =  ∂{d} 
 
 ∂ U 
In linear analysis [T] is constant and is based on the initial undeflected configuration, i.e. [TA]. In
geometrically nonlinear analysis, equilibrium and compatibility is satisfied in the deformed configuration
whilst in geometrically linear analysis, equilibrium and compatibility is satisfied in the undeformed
configuration. Further, the force transformation matrix is not the transpose of the displacement
transformation matrix in geometrically nonlinear analysis whilst it is in linear analysis. Thus, since
displacements are directly proportional to loads in linear analysis, results from different load cases can be
superimposed, whilst that cannot be done for nonlinear analysis. Accounting for the nonlinearity of [T] is
significant for large displacements and rotations in the case of cables, arches and thin plates. Consider a
thin plate subjected to transverse loads. Shell elements are based on classical bending theory, which
assumes that the transverse loads on a flat panel are resisted by bending alone. As a thin shell has little
bending resistance a linear analysis would then predict a very large displacement, much larger than the
limit of displacement/thickness ratios (often quoted from 0.3 to 1.0) for which the classical theory applies.
In reality, once some deformation has occurred a thin shell can resist loads by membrane tension, which is
very stiff compared with bending. Hence when we talk of small displacements for linear analysis to be
valid, it should be quoted in view of the thickness of the element, not the absolute displacement magnitude.
This is a geometric nonlinear effect where the load path and nature of deformation and stress field
literally changes with deflections, an effect that cannot be predicted by linear analysis. This does not occur
with curved panels such as cylinders under internal pressure, where the transverse load is carried by hoop
stresses, in which case a linear analysis may be sufficient.
2.1.5.2 Material Nonlinearity
In nonlinear material finite elements, the stress-strain relationships is nonlinear i.e. [D] would be a function of {ε}.
 
 [B] [D][B]dΩ 
∫
T
Ω 
In linear analysis, the stress-strain relationship is linear.
2.1.5.3 Contact and Boundary Conditions Nonlinearity
Nonlinear analysis is also able to change the boundary conditions as the analysis progresses. Contact can be
simulated where two or more parts of the structure collide, slide and separate.
2.1.6 GL, ML and GNL, MNL Dynamic Finite Element Elemental and Global Formulation
Dynamic analysis formulations differ from static analysis by the fact that in general they require two additional
matrices in the mass [M] and the damping [C] matrices. Assumed element interpolation functions now define the
element mass, damping and stiffness matrices, i.e. employing the constitutive law. The dynamic global equilibrium
equations are assembled (equilibrium law) from element contributions transformed (compatibility law) as
appropriate. The general global dynamic equilibrium equations for nonlinear analyses are
[M ]δ{U&&}+ [C T ]δ{U&}+ [K T ]δ{U} = δ{P(t )}

Since there can be prominent variations in the stiffness (and damping) matrices, the equilibrium equations is only
valid for small time steps at a time. Hence, either an implicit or explicit time stepping algorithm must be employed
to solve these equations for the unknowns, i.e. the global nodal displacement vector {U}. Finally, the element stress
recovery is performed based on the nodal displacement vector and the assumed interpolation function.
34
Second Edition
2.2 Static Analysis Concepts
2.2.1 Overview of Methods of Structural Static Analyses
Methods of structural static analysis may or may not incorporate nonlinearity in the form of geometric nonlinearity
and/or material nonlinearity.
1. Geometrically Linear (GL) Analysis

1.1 ML Static Analysis (The Implicit Direct Stiffness Method)
1.2 ML P-∆ Static Analysis (The Implicit Direct Stiffness Method)
1.3 ML Buckling (Linear Elastic Instability) Analysis (The Implicit Linear Eigenvalue Analysis)
1.4 MNL Plastic Collapse Analysis (The Implicit Linear Simplex Programming)
2. Geometrically Nonlinear (GNL) Analysis
2.1 ML Buckling Analysis (The Implicit Nonlinear Eigenvalue Analysis) – Not feasible practically
2.2 ML/MNL Static and Buckling Analysis (The Implicit Tracing The Equilibrium Path Method, The
Implicit Time Integration Method Employing Dynamic Relaxation or The Explicit Time Integration
Method Employing Dynamic Relaxation)
λ
ML, GL Static Analysis
ML, GL Buckling Analysis λECR
ML, GL P-∆ Static Analysis
ML, GNL Static and Buckling Analysis

(Tracing Equilibrium Path or Implicit or Explicit
Time Integration with Dynamic Relaxation)
MNL, GL Plastic
Collapse Analysis λP
MNL, GNL Static and Buckling Analysis

MNL, GL Elasto-Plastic (Tracing Equilibrium Path or Implicit or Explicit
Collapse Analysis λE Time Integration with Dynamic Relaxation) λF
U
Static Analysis Methods
GL: Geometrically Linear
GNL: Geometrically Nonlinear
ML: Materially Linear
MNL: Materially Nonlinear
35
Second Edition
2.3 Dynamic Analysis Concepts
2.3.1 Overview of Methods of Structural Dynamic Analyses
2.3.1.1 Modal Analyses
The modal properties of linear systems can be ascertained by either one of the following methods: -
(i) ML, GL real modal (eigenvalue) analysis SOL 103 to establish the modal frequencies, real modal
mass (and modal stiffness) and the real mode shapes
(ii) ML, GL complex modal (eigenvalue) analysis SOL 107 to establish the modal frequencies, modal
damping, complex modal mass (and complex modal stiffness) and the complex mode shapes
(iii) ML, GL time domain implicit (SOL 109, SOL 112 or SOL 129) or explicit (LS-DYNA) impulse
analysis to excite the modes of interest. The duration of the impulse must be sufficiently long (td/T1
> ~0.4) to excite the first fundamental mode, which is usually of concern. This would result in a
response that includes the first fundamental mode and most likely higher modes as well. The first
fundamental mode is readily ascertained from inspection of the response time history curve at any
node. Higher natural frequencies can also be ascertained by performing an FFT on the response
curve.
2.3.1.2 Forced Response Analyses
The methods of calculating forced dynamic response in MSC.NASTRAN are particularly of concern. Dynamic
forced response analyses can be performed in the frequency or the time domain.
It is important to understand the components of the result solved for by NASTRAN from the different forced
response solution schemes. In general, there are two components of response, i.e.
(i) the starting transient, and

(ii) the steady-state response
The excitations that contribute to the above components of response are
(i) the initial conditions, contributing to the starting transient

(ii) the steady-state force, contributing to both the starting transient and the steady-state response
MSC.NASTRAN Forced Response Analysis

Forced Response Analysis Initial Conditions Starting Transient Response Steady State Response
Modal Frequency No No Yes
Direct Frequency No No Yes
Modal Transient No Yes Yes
Direct Transient Yes Yes Yes
Methods of calculating the forced response generally depend on the nature of the excitation function. Dynamic
analysis can be performed in either the time domain or the frequency domain. Time domain dynamic analyses
include both transient and steady-state response, whilst frequency domain dynamic analysis only computes the
steady-state response. The types of excitations and the corresponding solution methods are: -
(i) ML, GL Deterministic periodic harmonic long duration excitations; The starting transient is
insignificant compared to the steady-state response. Forced response (steady-state) is performed in the
frequency domain using SOL 108 or SOL 111. Damping estimates ARE crucial.
36
Second Edition
(ii) ML, GL Deterministic periodic non-harmonic long duration excitations; The starting transient is
insignificant compared to the steady-state response. A periodic (of period T) function that is not
necessarily harmonic can be expressed as a summation of an infinite number of sine and cosine terms,
i.e. a Fourier Series. Forced responses (steady-state) are performed in the frequency domain using SOL
108 or SOL 111 with these individual harmonics (with the correct amplitudes and phase differences) as
the excitations. The total steady-state response is thus the summation of the responses of the individual
harmonics. Damping estimates ARE crucial.
(iii) ML/MNL, GL/GNL Deterministic non-periodic short duration impulse (a.k.a. blast) excitations
with subsequent wave propagation; The starting transient is significant as is steady-state response.
Sources of excitation include the start up of rotating machines (not the continuous functioning) being
brought to speed passing through various frequencies, but not sustaining any as to cause steady-state
conditions. Other sources include sudden impulse (force applied is the rate of change of momentum of
relatively small mass compared to mass of structure) or blast excitations. Forced response (starting
transient and steady-state) is performed in the time domain using SOL 109, SOL 112 or SOL 129.
Material properties that are not only nonlinear with the level of load but also the rate of loading (strain-
rate) may have to be incorporated in these sudden impulse analyses. Damping estimates ARE NOT
crucial.
(iv) ML, GL Random stationary (and ergodic) long duration excitations; This is the random equivalent
of the deterministic periodic (harmonic or non-harmonic) long duration excitation. The starting
transient is insignificant compared to the steady-state response. Forced response (steady-state) is
performed in the frequency domain using random vibration analysis (with Fast Fourier Transforms
FFT) utilizing SOL 108 or SOL 111. Damping estimates ARE crucial. Forced response in the time
domain using deterministic methods may not be appropriate as they will be too computationally
expensive due to the long duration of the excitation and the maximum response will be governed by
steady-state conditions, not by the starting transient response.
(v) ML/MNL, GL/GNL Random non-stationary short duration impulse excitations; This is the
random equivalent of the deterministic non-periodic short duration impulse excitations. The starting
transient is significant as is the steady-state response. Earthquake signals can be said to fall in this
category. Forced responses (starting transient and steady-state) are performed in the time domain using
SOL 109, SOL 112 or SOL 129 with a set of deterministic transient excitations generated from the
non-stationary random excitations and the results enveloped. Alternatively, forced response (starting
transient and steady-state) is performed crudely in the time domain using response (shock) spectrum
analysis. Damping estimates ARE still quite crucial. Steady-state forced response in the frequency
domain may not be appropriate since the duration of excitation may not be long enough for the
response of the structure to reach steady-state conditions.
(vi) MNL, GNL Projectile (a.k.a. impact) excitations with subsequent wave propagation; Forced
response (starting transient and steady-state) can only be performed in the time domain using an
explicit (implicit would be too expensive because of the high nonlinearity) nonlinear time integration
scheme. Sudden impulse analyses involve the specification of an initial velocity to the impacting
particle placed very close to the impacted structure. The particle will travel at this constant initial
velocity (since no other forces, retarding or accelerating) until impacting the structure whereby a
certain percentage of the mass of the structure and the mass of the particle will interact to cause a
change of momentum, i.e. an impulse. Material properties that are not only nonlinear with the level of
load but also the rate of loading (strain-rate) will have to be incorporated in these sudden impact
analyses. Damping estimates ARE NOT crucial.
(vii) MNL, GNL Brittle snap or redundancy check; These include the analysis of sudden fracture of
structural members from the static equilibrium configuration such as the sudden snapping of a
prestressed structural cable, and evaluates the redundancy available within the structure. Forced
37
Second Edition
response (starting transient and steady-state) can only be performed in the time domain using an
explicit (implicit would be too expensive because of the high nonlinearity) nonlinear time integration
scheme. This analysis always involves a two-stage procedure. The first stage involves a static solution
by a linear static method or a nonlinear static method (either Newton’s tracing the equilibrium path
SOL 106, an implicit dynamic relaxation by SOL 129 or an explicit dynamic relaxation method LS-
DYNA) in order to obtain the deflected configuration and the stiffness of the structure in the deflected
configuration KT by the prestress (prestressing of structural members such as cables contribute greatly
to a large change in stiffness within the static solution and hence will require a nonlinear static method)
and gravity. The second stage involves a restart into a nonlinear transient dynamic solution scheme
with no additional dynamic excitation but with a change in the structure (in the deletion of a member
that fails in brittle fashion simulating a redundancy check) or a change in boundary condition (to
simulate the effect of the loss of a support or anchor attached to a prestressed cable etc.). An example
would be the gradual prestressing of structural cable elements within a suspension bridge or a cable
prestressed tower until a static solution (by SOL 106, implicit SOL 129 or explicit LS-DYNA) is
achieved. The cables can be prestressed using a gradual temperature load case (or a gradual enforced
displacement on the cable anchorage points) plus gravitational loads until the correct level of prestress
is achieved (by SOL 106, implicit SOL 129 or explicit LS-DYNA). Then with a restart into an explicit
transient dynamic scheme of LS-DYNA, the boundary condition supporting the cable is released or a
cable element is deleted, causing the structure to experience an out-of-balance of forces and hence
vibrate to a new static equilibrium configuration. Damping estimates ARE NOT crucial.
2.3.2 Nature of Trial Solution in Harmonic Frequency Vibrations
Complementary Function (Starting Transient)

SDOF Modal MDOF Direct MDOF
λt
u(t) = Ge N/A N/A
G = G1 + iG2
λ = α + iω
Particular Integral Function

SDOF Modal MDOF Direct MDOF
u(t) = F(ω)eiωt {u(t)} = [Φ]{ξ(ω)}eiωt {u(t)} = {F(ω)}eiωt
F(ω) = F1(ω) + iF2(ω) {ξ(ω)} = {ξ1(ω)} + i{ξ2(ω)} {F(ω)} = {F1(ω)} + i{F2(ω)}
38
Second Edition
2.4 Static and Dynamic Analyses Sequences
A dynamic analysis is always performed about the static equilibrium position. That is to say, the structure should be
in static equilibrium before dynamic loads are applied. To obtain the total response, a few approaches may be used.
In the first approach, valid for both LINEAR AND NONLINEAR TIME DOMAIN solutions, the static
response must be added to the dynamic response if the dynamic analysis is performed about the initial undeflected
(by the static loads) state with only the dynamic loads applied, hence causing the dynamic response to be measured
relative to the static equilibrium position. This is because if the response is taken to be measured from this static
equilibrium position, it can be shown that the static loads do not feature in the dynamic equation of motion. This
enables the exclusion of static loads in the dynamic analysis. However, since the dynamic response is measured
from the static equilibrium position, the total response = the dynamic response + the static response to static
loads.
In the second approach, valid for both LINEAR AND NONLINEAR TIME DOMAIN solutions, if the
dynamic analysis is performed with the deflected static shape as initial input and the static loads maintained
throughout the dynamic excitations, the total or absolute response (static and dynamic) is obtained straight away
from the dynamic analysis. Hence total response = dynamic response (which already includes the static
response to static loads).
In the third approach, valid for LINEAR FREQUENCY DOMAIN solutions, not only that the static response
has to be added separately, but also the mean of the dynamic excitation has also got to be added separately as a
static response. This is because for both deterministic periodic excitations and random PSD excitations the mean of
the dynamically applied force is not included in the dynamic excitations. Hence the total response = static
response to mean of dynamic excitation + dynamic response + static response to static loads.
Analyses Sequences
Static Analysis Dynamic Analysis Remark
Modal analysis about static equilibrium position.
GL modal analysis
None Performed if both static and dynamic displacements
with [KEA]
are small.
GL Modal Analysis
GNL (SOL 106, implicit

relaxation SOL 129 or
explicit relaxation LS-
Modal analysis about static equilibrium position.
DYNA) analysis to
GL modal analysis Performed if static displacements are large and
establish [KTA] at position
with [KTA] dynamic displacements are small such as in the
of static equilibrium A.
analysis of cable vibrations.
Approximate [KTA] can
be obtained by repetitive
P-∆ static analysis.
GL buckling Buckling analysis about static equilibrium position.
None analysis with [KEA] Performed if both static and buckling displacements
GL Buckling Analysis
and hence [KGKEA] are small.

Buckling analysis about static equilibrium position.
DYNA) analysis to GL buckling
Performed if static displacements are large and
establish [KTA] at position analysis with [KTA]
buckling displacements are small such as in the
of static equilibrium A. and hence [KGKTA]
A analysis of systems with prestress.
Approximate [KT ] can
39
Second Edition
Forced frequency response analysis about static

GL frequency equilibrium position. Performed if both static and
GL Forced Frequency Response
response analysis dynamic displacements are small. The dynamic

None (no static loads, response is measured from the static equilibrium
only frequency position. Hence, to ascertain the total response, the
dependent loads) static response to static loads and static response to the
mean of the dynamic excitations must be superposed.
Forced frequency response analysis about static
GL frequency equilibrium position. Performed if static displacements
response analysis are large and dynamic displacements are small. The
DYNA) analysis to
with [KTA] (no dynamic response is measured from the static
static loads, only equilibrium position. Hence, to ascertain the total
of static equilibrium A.
frequency response, the static response to static loads and static
Approximate [KTA] can
dependent loads) response to the mean of the dynamic excitations must
be superposed.
Forced transient response analysis about static
GL transient
equilibrium position. Performed if both static and
response analysis
dynamic displacements are small. The dynamic
None (no static loads,
response is measured from the static equilibrium
only transient
position. Hence, to ascertain the total response, the
loads)
static response to static loads must be superposed.
relaxation SOL 129 or Forced transient response analysis about static
explicit relaxation LS- GL transient equilibrium position. Performed if static displacements
GL Forced Transient Response
DYNA) analysis to response analysis are large and dynamic displacements are small. The
establish [KTA] at position with [KTA] (no dynamic response is measured from the static
of static equilibrium A. static loads, only equilibrium position. Hence, to ascertain the total
Approximate [KTA] can transient loads) response, the static response to static loads must be
be obtained by repetitive superposed.
GL transient
response analysis
with [KTA] and
DYNA) analysis to
initial dynamic Forced transient response analysis about initial
displacements as undeflected by static loads position i.e. the absolute
of static equilibrium A
the converged static response. Performed if static displacements are large
and the converged static
displacements and dynamic displacements are small. The response is
displacements.
(with constant with the absolute response, i.e. includes both the static and
Approximate [KTA] and
time equivalent dynamic response.
the converged static
dynamic static
displacements can also be
loads, and the
obtained by repetitive P-
transient loads)
∆ static analysis.
40
Second Edition
Forced transient response analysis about static

GNL transient equilibrium position. Performed if static displacements
response analysis are small and dynamic displacements are large. The
None (no equivalent dynamic response is measured from the static
static loads, only equilibrium position. Hence, to ascertain the total
transient loads) response, the static response to static loads must be
superposed.
This should not be performed. The structure eventually
vibrates about its static equilibrium position, albeit in a
while. However, by applying the static loads together
GNL transient
GNL Forced Transient Response
with the dynamic loads can cause dynamic

response analysis
amplification that is unrealistic. The static loads should
with constant with
not cause any dynamic effects (if that happens,
None time equivalent
nonlinear materials in the model may yield
dynamic static
prematurely), because by its very definition, the static
loads, and the
loads are static i.e. applied over an infinitely long
transient loads)
duration. Instead, the static loads should be applied by
SOL 106, implicit relaxation SOL 129 or explicit
relaxation, then only dynamic analysis be performed.
GNL transient
response analysis
with [KTA] and
DYNA) analysis to
initial dynamic Forced transient response analysis about initial
displacements as undeflected by static loads position i.e. the absolute
of static equilibrium A
the converged static response. Performed if both static and dynamic
and the converged static
displacements with displacements are large. The response is the absolute
displacements.
(with constant with response, i.e. includes both the static and dynamic
Approximate [KTA] and
time equivalent response.
the converged static
dynamic static
displacements can also be
loads, and the
obtained by repetitive P-
transient loads)
∆ static analysis.
Note that when restarting a transient analysis from a nonlinear static analysis (SOL 106, implicit relaxation SOL
129 or explicit relaxation LS-DYNA), the static loads which have been applied must be maintained throughout the
transient phase in order to preserve the correct stiffness and the correct static equilibrium at the deflected static
equilibrium position. Hence, when a transient phase dynamic analysis follows a dynamic relaxation analysis, it is
prudent to define two curves for the static loads or prescribed motions, one ramped from zero to the static value in
the dynamic relaxation phase and the other maintained at the same static throughout the transient dynamic analysis
phase. Transient analysis is usually performed after a static solution has been achieved either by SOL 106, implicit
relaxation SOL 129 or explicit relaxation LS-DYNA. The only benefit of performing dynamic relaxation prior to a
transient analysis is that the structure would reach its static equilibrium position quicker before the transient phase
takes place. In dynamic relaxation, the damping applied very large, in the order of about 5% of critical, whereas in
the transient phase, the structure is very much under-damped. But even if the transient analysis were to be
performed without dynamic relaxation, the structure would eventually vibrate about its static equilibrium position,
albeit in a while as long as the static gravitational loads are applied. Hence of course, if dynamic relaxation is
employed, after the dynamic relaxation phase, the static loads should be maintained throughout the transient
dynamic analysis phase. It is however, theoretically incorrect to vibrate the structure from an unstressed position as
in reality, the structure would be in its static equilibrium position before being subjected to transient dynamic
vibration. In practice however, it can be argued that a dynamic analysis can be done without a static solution if
negligible change in stiffness occurs from the static deflections (valid if static deflections are small), of course so
long as it is clear that the total response must then be the addition of the static response and the dynamic response,
both performed separately from the initial undeflected configuration.
41
Second Edition
3 METHODS OF STATIC ANALYSES
3.1 GL, ML Static Analysis by The Implicit Direct Stiffness Method
3.1.1 Mathematical Formulation of Analysis
λ ML, GL Static Analysis

∆ Static Analysis
ML, GL P-∆

MNL, GL Plastic
MNL, GL Elasto-Plastic
Time Integration with Dynamic Relaxation) λF
Collapse Analysis λE
U
We have shown that the nodal static equilibrium equations can be written as a set of linear simultaneous equations
[ ] {∫ [B
{P} = K AE {U} + [T A ]T A T
}
] {σ}i dΩ − [T A ] T {∫ [B ] [D ]{ε} dΩ}− [T ] {∫ [N] {b}dΩ}
A T A
i
A T Τ
] [∫ [B ] [ D ][B ]dΩ][T ]
Ω Ω Ω
where [K ] = [T ] [k ][T
A
E
A T A
E
A
] = [T A T A T A A A
Ω
Geometrically linear stiffness response represents only a tangential approximation to the fundamental path at the
initial unloaded state. Hence, the results are valid in a range of small displacements and loading. Tangential
accuracy of linear analysis depends upon the magnitude of deflection, the component forces and the applied
loading. The geometrically linear equilibrium equations are solved for the unknown displacements {U}.
[ ]
Linear static K AE {U} = {P} + {Fixed End Forces}
[ ]
Linear static P - Delta K TA {U} = {P} + {Fixed End Forces}
The linear static analysis is based on only the instantaneous stiffness matrix [KE] at the initial undeflected stage
[KEA]. The linear static P-∆ analysis is based on the instantaneous and geometric (or differential) stiffness at the
initial undeflected stage i.e. taking in to account the initial prestress and initial external load on the stiffness of the
structure. The linear equations are solved simultaneous by decomposing [K] to triangular matrices, and then
performing forward-backward substitution to obtain {U}. This is called the LU-decomposition method of solving
linear simultaneous equations.
[K ]{U} = {P} + {Fixed End Forces}

[L][U ]{U} = {P} + {Fixed End Forces}
Forward Pass [ L]{y} = {P} + {Fixed End Forces } for {y}
Backward Pass [U ]{U} = {y} for {U}
42
Second Edition
3.1.2 Concepts of Geometric Stiffness or P-∆ (KGA From KEA) Analysis 1
The geometric stiffness or P-∆ concept will be illustrated for a simple system. A parameter that describes the
prominence of the geometric stiffness for a particular system and level of loading will then be presented.
Let us assume that deflections are small (hence geometrically linear analysis) hence the rotation of the column
segments can be described and any change in height can be neglected. Lateral equilibrium at the central pin shows
that
Note that the spring force depends only on the deflection x, while the lateral force generated by the component of N
depends on the deflection plus the initial imperfection, x + x0. Rearranging so that we have the form Stiffness x
Displacement = Applied Force, we get
Geometric Stiffness 2N/L

and hence the deflection
i.e.
We can see that the effect of the force N acting on this system can be seen as being like an additional stiffness term
2N/L, i.e. the geometric (aka differential) stiffness. The effect of the axial force is equivalent to an additional
stiffness of value 2N / L acting laterally at the pin location. If the force is tensile (i.e. positive) then the geometric
stiffness will act to increase the overall stiffness of the system. The effects on the system tend to be beneficial, the
lateral deflection and hence the restraining force in the spring are reduced. Some practical examples where this type
of stiffness is important are in the strings of musical instruments where the tension is adjusted to give the required
natural frequency, in the blades of jet engines where the vibration characteristics are improved and the root bending
1
DALLARD, PAT. Buckling – An Approach Based on Geometric Stiffness and Eigen Analysis. Ove Arup & Partners
International Ltd., London, June 1998.
43
Second Edition
moments reduced by the tension stiffening arising from rotation and in the antisymmetric response of unbraced
cable trusses and cable nets where the ‘real’ (i.e. instantaneous, not geometric) stiffness may be negligible. On the
other hand, if it is compressive then the term will be negative and the system stiffness will decrease. The effects on
the system tend to be detrimental, the lateral deflection and hence the restraining force in the spring are increased.
To reiterate, if N is compressive then the geometric stiffness is negative and x (the deflection) will be greater than it
would be otherwise. If x is greater then the force in the spring will be greater. If we were designing that spring then
we would need a stronger one than we first suspected. Therefore the effect of negative geometric stiffness (also
known as the P-∆ effect) can be significant in design in some circumstances.
The question is, when will this negative geometric stiffness effect be significant and when can we ignore it? One
good answer to this question is to examine the dimensionless parameter λcr (also known as the critical linear elastic
buckling load factor of a system).
λcr indicates the level of significance of the negative geometric stiffness (P-∆ effects) in a structure. Finding the
value of λcr is effectively a linearized buckling analysis (SOL 105). Note that λcr refers to the critical linear elastic
buckling load factor and not to the slenderness parameter associated with member elements such as columns and
beams, which is also normally referred to by λ. In this simple pin jointed system example however, the buckling
factor can easily be derived by considering the condition at which the axial compression is so great that the lateral
stiffness of the system is zero.
i.e.
The λcr expression is independent of the lateral load and the initial lateral imperfections. Hence, in the
absence of geometric stiffness considerations, there would be an abrupt bifurcation in the behavior of the system
at the critical load. It is the deflection expression, presented hereafter, that the effects of the geometric stiffness
considerations are seen as causing progressive amplification to lateral loads and initial lateral imperfections as the
compressive load is increased until the critical load. Expressing the deflection expression in terms of Ncr
Expressing the deflection equation again, but now in terms of λcr and the deflection without geometric stiffness
considerations (i.e. N = 0)
we have thus the deflection expression a function of λcr, the initial imperfection x0 and xN=0
Deflection Expression
This expression consists of two terms, the first being the amplified lateral response to lateral load when there is
the geometric stiffness consideration and the second being the amplified (addition to the) lateral response to
an initial imperfection when there is the geometric stiffness consideration. We say ‘addition to the’ lateral
response for the second term because the deflection x is measured relative to the initial imperfection and not
from the initial undeflected configuration. If there were no geometric stiffness consideration, there would be an
abrupt bifurcation in the behavior of the system at the critical load Ncr. The effect of the geometric stiffness
consideration are seen as causing progressive amplification to the lateral loads and initial lateral imperfections as
the compressive load is increased until the critical load. It has the effect of amplifying the lateral deflection and
44
Second Edition
hence the spring force, or more generally, the forces in the elements resisting the lateral load. This is the P-∆
effect. The effects are apparent in practice. With the geometric stiffness consideration (and the existence of
lateral loads and/or initial lateral imperfections), when a slender element is subject to axial compression, it tends
to gradually bend before reaching the point of elastic instability. With the geometric stiffness consideration (and
the existence of lateral loads and/or initial lateral imperfections), if a beam is subject to major axis bending,
there is a tendency for the beam to twist and bend about its minor axis before lateral torsional buckling eventually
occurs.
We shall investigate the amplified lateral displacement to lateral loads when there is the geometric stiffness
consideration, which was shown to be
The definition of λcr is handy because it means that if λcr is a positive number greater than 1, then you have a
structure that is stable, but that the structural response will be amplified by negative geometric stiffness effects. If 0
< λcr < 1, then the system is unstable. And if λcr is negative then the structural response will be attenuated by
positive geometric effects. Here are some values of λcr and their corresponding amplification values.
We can see that when λcr > 10 the effects of negative geometric stiffness (P-∆ effects) are so small as to be
insignificant to an engineering level of accuracy (accurate within 10%), whereas as they approach 1 they are very
significant indeed. This then is the test that we were looking for. We can use the value of λcr to decide whether we
need to take further account of negative geometric stiffness in our design and analysis. Generally,
If λcr > 10 then P-∆ effects are insignificant and can be neglected – Perform linear analysis
If 4 < λcr < 10, P-∆ effects (i.e. the geometric stiffness) should be incorporated – Perform P-∆ analysis
If λcr < 4, a second order nonlinear analysis should be undertaken – Perform GNL SOL 106 analysis
If λcr is 1 or less (but still positive) then amplification is infinite and some significant changes must be made to the
design! It would be a mistake to be too scared of low λcr values. A very ordinary column in a building can have a
λcr of < 1.6, and quite ordinary bracing systems for office buildings can have a λcr of < 4. But conversely it is not
something that we can ignore and if response calculations are intended, a GNL SOL 106 must be performed.
The amplified (addition to the) lateral displacement to an initial imperfection when there is the geometric
stiffness consideration was shown to be
45
Second Edition
When λcr is large the response will be small, when λcr is small, but >1 the response will be large, and when λcr = 1
the response becomes infinite, in a similar way to the amplified lateral displacement to lateral loads due to the
geometric stiffness consideration.
The geometric stiffness equation for a 2D bar element is presented. Assume the bar has an axial force N (tension +)
and length L, and use the local directions shown in the following diagram.
The active terms relate the geometric stiffening forces to the products of member forces and deflections. The terms
in the instantaneous stiffness matrix KE depend on the Young’s modulus and Poisson’s ratio of the material, and the
geometry of the element (the geometry of a beam element, for example, would include both the cross sectional
properties and the length of the element). In contrast, the terms in the geometric stiffness matrix KG depend
(linearly) on the forces in the element and the element geometry. The variation of the KG matrix with element
forces means that any analysis using a KG matrix needs to be carried out in two stages. In the first stage the problem
is solved ignoring the effects of geometric stiffening, establishing a set of element forces. These element forces are
used in the second stage to construct the KG matrix. An important consequence of the variation of the KG matrix
with element forces is that the KG matrix for one load case will differ from that for another. Hence while we can
always refer to the instantaneous stiffness matrix as KE, we need to identify the geometric stiffness matrix by
reference to the load case m for which it was derived, say KGm. The KG matrix is symmetric with connectivity
similar to the KE matrix.
In conclusion, the P-∆ effect is the reduction of lateral stiffness when the element is subjected to axial
compression such that there is an amplified lateral response to lateral loads and an amplified (addition to
the) lateral response to initial lateral imperfections (and subsequently the response of the elements providing
lateral restraint) according to
1
1 λ cr λ cr 1
x= x + x i.e. x= x N =0 + x0
1 N =0 1 0 λ cr − 1 λ cr − 1
1− 1−
λ cr λ cr
We have said that the deflection x is measured relative to the initial imperfection x0. If instead we present the
deflection relative to the initial undeflected configuration, then we need to add x0. Hence
λ cr 1 λ cr 1 λ −1 λ cr λ cr
x + x0 = x N =0 + x0 + x0 = x N =0 + x 0 + cr x0 = x N =0 + x0
λ cr − 1 λ cr − 1 λ cr − 1 λ cr − 1 λ cr − 1 λ cr − 1 λ cr − 1
λ cr
x + x0 = (x N = 0 + x 0 )
λ cr − 1
46
Second Edition
Thus the deflection (measured from the initial undeflected configuration) to lateral loads and initial lateral
imperfections is amplified by λcr / (λcr – 1). This is a very important formula and can be applied
approximately to all other general cases.
To reiterate this rather important point, the above amplification λcr / (λcr – 1) was derived for a pin jointed system.
It can be shown that the same amplification results for the deflection and stress effects on other general systems.
For example, a strut with an initial imperfection x0 would have a transverse deflection distribution according to
x0sin(πx/L). With an axial load N, the transverse deflection would be x0sin(πx/L) [λcr / (λcr – 1)] where the buckling
load is the Euler load, i.e. π2EI/L2. It follows that the bending moment distribution would be Nx0sin(πx/L) [λcr / (λcr
– 1)]. For another example, a beam with a UDL would have a central deflection of 5ωL4/384EI and bending
moment of ωL2/8. A good approximation to the central deflection of the beam-column with an axial load of N is
(5ωL4/384EI) [λcr / (λcr – 1)] where the buckling load is the Euler load, i.e. π2EI/L2. It follows that the central
bending moment is approximately (ωL2/8) [λcr / (λcr – 1)].
Generally, for response computations

If λcr > 10 then P-∆ effects are insignificant and can be neglected – Perform linear analysis
If 4 < λcr < 10, P-∆ effects (i.e. the geometric stiffness) should be incorporated – Perform P-∆ analysis
If λcr < 4, a second order nonlinear analysis should be undertaken – Perform GNL SOL 106 analysis
Note that λcr is obtained from a linearized buckling analysis (SOL 105).
The above proceedings described P-∆ analysis as a procedure by which the lateral stiffness is altered when a
member is subject to an axial force, hence causing more lateral deflection and thus a greater bending moment in the
member. An analogous way of looking at this is to consider an axial strut also subject to a lateral force. The lateral
force causes a lateral deflection, ∆. On application of the axial force P, a bending moment equal to P.∆ will be
induced in the member.
47
Second Edition
3.1.3 Performing P-∆ (KGA From KEA) Linear Static Analysis – Direct Approach
The governing equation is
[K ]{U} = {P} + {Fixed End Forces} + {Initial Imperfections}

A
T
This equation is directly analogous to the equilibrium equation derived for the simple pin jointed system above.
The initial imperfections are functions of the geometric stiffness, hence
[K A
E ] [ ]
+ K GA {U} = {P} + {Fixed End Forces} − K GA {U 0 }
Note that {U0} is a vector of initial imperfections. Because {U0} is difficult and unintuitive to define, the modal
approach presented in Section 3.1.4 should be employed to perform the P-∆ analysis.
To perform a P-∆ analysis, first the value of λcr is established to decide whether and how account is made of the
negative geometric stiffness.
If λcr > 10 then P-∆ effects are unlikely to be significant and can be neglected
If 4 < λcr < 10, P-∆ effects (i.e. the geometric stiffness) should be incorporated
If λcr < 4, a second order nonlinear analysis (GNL analysis SOL 106) should be undertaken
Hence, only if λcr > 4 can we employ the P-∆ method for response computations. Any less, and a SOL 106 must
be undertaken. To perform the P-∆ analysis, two linear static analyses are required. First, a linear static analysis is
performed with the (ultimate limit state) loads m upon the instantaneous stiffness KEA to assess the distribution of
axial forces in the structure. These axial forces are used to generate the geometric stiffness matrix for that load case
m, KGmA which is combined with KEA to form the tangent stiffness matrix KTmA. A second linear analysis is then
performed with the (ultimate limit state) loads upon the tangent stiffness KTmA to generate the P-∆ response.
{U m } = [K AE + K Gm
A
] {{P
−1
m } + {Fixed End Forces}m [
− K Gm
A
]
{U 0 } }
Note that when we are doing an ultimate limit state design, as we generally are, the axial forces that cause the P-∆
amplification need to be ultimate axial forces, otherwise we will underestimate the amplification. For this reason
the loading on the structure needs to be the ultimate loading. And the results will be ultimate forces. You can’t
apply characteristic loads, run the P-∆ analysis, and then factor the loads and responses up, because the
amplification effect is nonlinear, as observed on the P-∆ curve below, i.e. if the initial compressive loads m
were higher, then the geometric stiffness will be larger and the response will be greater. Of course, the initial
loads m should be too great as to cause λcr to be less than 4. The down side of this is that each P-∆ case has to be
run as an individual analysis and you can’t combine P-∆ results in the conventional way, though you can of
course envelope them.

∆ Static Analysis
ML, GL P-∆

MNL, GL Plastic
U
48
Second Edition
The P-∆ method can be used to evaluate the fundamental buckling load factor. If the loads m were made too
high, the geometric stiffness may become greater than the instantaneous stiffness, and the equations cannot be
solved. Linear elastic buckling would have occurred. This means that we could in theory gradually increase the
load m, run the P-∆ analysis involving the two passes each time, until the equations cannot be solved. The load at
this stage is the lowest elastic buckling load. Performing this traces the above P-∆ equilibrium path. Note that the
line is curved, but not flat at the onset of buckling as it is not a nonlinear method. Response calculations near the
buckling load may not be accurate as λcr would be less than 4. It is much faster (and far more efficient in design) to
evaluate the buckling load factor by performing an eigenvalue analysis (SOL 105). Moreover, the buckling mode
shape will be clearly visible.
The P-∆ method may NOT be accurate in evaluating the deflection response just before the onset of the
fundamental buckling mode.
[K A
E ] [ ]
+ K GA {U} = {Pcr } + {Fixed End Forces} − K GA {U 0 }
P-∆ analysis is only accurate when λ is large, i.e. λ > 4. Hence, if the loads p0 were scaled to just below λp0, and a
P-∆ analysis undertaken, the displacement response may be inaccurate because now the load factor on λp0 is very
close to unity. A nonlinear static and buckling analysis SOL 106 is recommended.
49
Second Edition
3.1.4 Performing P-∆ (KGA From KEA) Linear Static Analysis – Modal Approach; And Hence P-∆ Based
Buckling 2
3.1.4.1 Objectives
Finding the P-∆ response by solving the P-∆ equation directly is presented in Section 3.1.3. While this method
certainly works, a more intuitive modal approach may be desirable. The advantages of the modal approach are that
(i) it helps to determine the most critical load combination to maximize the P-∆ effects
(ii) it also allows for the imperfections (modeled to be proportional to the mode shape) to be
incorporated to maximize the response and hence determine the elastic buckling capacity based on
a P-∆ approach as is consistent with the BS 5950 code based Perry-Robertson method.
The basis of the modal approach is the ability of the buckling mode shapes to orthogonalize the P-∆ static
equilibrium equation into a set of uncoupled modal equilibrium equations, which can be solved independently for
the modal responses. These modal responses can then be transformed into the physical coordinates in order to
obtain the physical response. In doing so, of course there will be a certain degree of modal truncation. To obtain the
same answer as that of the direct approach (without imperfections), ALL the modes (equal to the number of DOFs)
need to be employed. Since it is difficult (and unnecessary) to determine which modes really contribute to the static
response, we shall employ the direct approach anyway. But with the addition here, that we include the response
due to the imperfections as well. The imperfections are assumed to be proportional to the mode shape. In fact, the
imperfections that really need to be incorporated are that of only the lower modes (λcr < 10). Thus, the modal
approach here is not intended as an alternative to the direct approach, but simply as an addition to incorporate the
(modal) imperfections for a P-∆ based buckling capacity prediction in line with the code based Perry-
Robertson method and also to aid the selection of the critical load case.
3.1.4.2 Mathematical Formulation
A linear static analysis is first performed with load case m upon the instantaneous stiffness KEA in order to generate
the geometric stiffness matrix for the particular load case KGm. The eigenvalue problem is
Note that the eigenvalue problem has to be associated with a particular load case m as the geometric stiffness
matrix is dependent upon the particular load case. The eigenvalue problem is solved for the critical load factors and
associated mode shapes.
Solving the eigenvalue problem does not however produce a physical response. For this we consider the static
equilibrium equation.
2
DALLARD, PAT. Buckling – An Approach Based on Geometric Stiffness and Eigen Analysis. Ove Arup & Partners
International Ltd., London, June 1998.
50
Second Edition
Note that the initial imperfections is really just an additional load and is probably more illustrated if the associated
terms were brought onto the RHS of the equation as –KGmx0. This equation can be solved directly as performed in
Section 3.1.3. But this provides little insight into the buckled mode and hence the critical loading and pattern of
imperfection that should be considered in design. As mentioned, the following eigenvalue approach is much more
insightful in determining the response (deflections and forces). Representing the deflections as the summation of
the responses in the individual modes
and the initial imperfections as the summation of imperfections in the individual modes (hence assuming that the
shape of the imperfections is the same as the shape of the buckled mode shapes)
On substitution,
Premultiplying by the transpose of the mode shape matrix, rightly treating the imperfections as additional loads
Both KE and KGm will be diagonalized to give the modal stiffness and modal geometric stiffness
This is now a set of independent equations. Consider the ith equation as typical
Hence, the modal response
Separating the force and imperfection terms
The relationship between the modal stiffness, the modal geometric stiffness and the critical load factor λcri is
Also, from the modal response expression, the modal response ignoring the geometric stiffening effects is seen to
be the modal load {φi}T{f} divided by the modal stiffness
51
Second Edition
Hence, the modal response expression can be rewritten as
Modal Deflection Expression
This modal deflection expression is analogous to the deflection expression derived in Section 3.1.2 for the simple
pin-jointed column. Again, when there is geometric stiffness considerations, there is an amplified modal
response to modal loads and an amplified (addition to the) modal response to initial modal imperfections
(and subsequently the response of the elements providing restraint to the modal response).
A consequence of the modal nature of equation of the modal deflection expression is that the overall response
amplifier is difficult to predict. The amplifier 1/(1-1/λcr1) corresponding to the lowest buckling mode only applies
to that part of the loading which contributes to the modal force {φ1}T{f}, different amplifiers apply to the other
components of load. Hence it is unlikely that the total response will be amplified by 1/(1-1/λcr1). To illustrate this
consider a simple pin ended column subject to axial load and distributed lateral load. The 1/(1-1/λcr1) amplifier
would apply overall if the lateral load distribution followed the sinusoidal shape of the first buckling mode. This
pattern of loading would result in zero modal forces in all modes except the first. If the lateral load distribution was
uniform, say, it would generate modal forces in all odd numbered modes, each of which would have a different
modal amplifier, and would result in a different overall amplifier.
In theory, the physical P-∆ response can finally be obtained from
And by employing ALL the modes, the exact same response as that from the direct approach (without
imperfections) will be obtained. But that is not the purpose of our exercise here. We are going to employ the direct
approach anyway, this exercise is simply to aid the selection of the critical load case and for the modelling of the
(modal) imperfections.
3.1.4.3 Critical Load Case Considerations
The loading used to design a structure prone to buckling must be selected with care. This is done in order to obtain
the lowest possible load factor. Greater understanding of what loading may be critical can be gained from the
modal deflection equation. It is useful to consider the loading on a structure as consisting of two parts applied
simultaneously
(a) loading which determines the value of the amplifier (via λcri) but does not contribute to the linear
modal response, qi’
(b) loading which determines the value of the linear modal response qi’ (via {φi}T{f}) but does not affect
the amplifier (via λcri)
In a column, the axial load determines the value of the amplifier but does not contribute to the linear bending, while
the lateral load determines the linear bending but does not affect the amplifier. Consider an arch prone to sway
buckling and subject to asymmetric loading
52
Second Edition
Divide the loading into symmetric funicular and antisymmetric non-funicular components.
The funicular loading determines the axial force in the arch and hence the amplifier, but does not contribute to the
linear bending. The antisymmetric loading determines the linear bending but does not affect the amplifier.
In the design of buckling sensitive structures, consideration needs to be given to how these two types of loading
vary against each other. The greatest overall response is likely to occur when the product of the linear
response and the amplification factor is maximized.
3.1.4.4 Modelling (Modal) Imperfections
Imperfections corresponding to a particular mode shape cause response in that mode shape and not in any other.
The modal response (in modal coordinates) due to imperfections is 1/(λcri–1) times the magnitude of the modal
imperfection, q0i. Thus in physical coordinates, the modal response due to imperfections will be (1/(λcri–1))q0i{φ}i.
Hence, the additional element forces due to imperfections can be calculated in a post-processing operation, using
the additional modal responses due to imperfections simply to scale the modal element forces. It is usually
sufficient to consider imperfections mode by mode, rather than combined. The value of q0i should be selected to
cover the effects of all imperfections, including residual stresses and tolerance.
Now, from the theoretical derivation of the Perry-Robertson buckling capacity formula, the theoretical Perry
imperfection factor η is obtained
Ax 0 x y x y x L y
η= = 02 = 0 = 0
Z r r r L r r
where x0 is the initial imperfection. The Perry factor η is the imperfection factor which is dependent upon the
initial eccentricity, x0 and also the cross sectional properties. But BS 5950-Part 1:2000 goes a step further and
requires an increase in the Perry factor due to residual stresses from rolling and welding. It thus states that the Perry
factor should be
a (L e − L o )
η= a = Robertson constant
1000 ry
The Robertson constant, a divided by 1000, i.e. a/1000 is equivalent to (x0/L)(y/r) and includes the initial
imperfection, the section shape and also residual stresses. On equivalence of the two expressions for the Perry
factor, an equivalent initial imperfection x0 (or rather q0i here) can be obtained as
x0 ry a
q 0i = where x 0 = Ld
xg y 1000
The value of the initial imperfection x0 is purposely derived to be perfectly consistent with the BS 5950-Part 1:2000
Perry-Robertson formula. We can get values for x0 that depend on the strut curve (Table 23 in BS 5950-Part
1:2000), the length of the buckled waveform Ld, and a single geometric property (ry/y) of the section that is
buckling. The table below shows some appropriate values of x0 to use in common cases.
53
Second Edition
These values apply for the situations in the table. We have used values of ry/y that are conservative for each of the
particular ranges of section type. If your structure doesn’t conform to one of the ones listed then you need to derive
a value of x0 for your particular structure using the equation for x0. Don’t forget that ry/y can never be greater than 1
for a symmetrical section. The values of x0 that are given by the equation and shown in the table are derived for
flexural buckling, that is buckled modes that are controlled by bending of some element or elements. When the
buckling is controlled by axial extension of, for instance, a bracing system, or by shear deflections, then there is no
direct method of calculating a correlation to BS 5950-Part 1:2000. In these ‘shear buckling’ situations it seems
prudent to use a value of x0 = Ld/250.
Mind you, don’t get too hung up on the detail of these calculations; BS 5950-Part 1:2000 says that we can ignore
these effects if they contribute less than 10% of the moment in a section. By implication it is pointless to try to
evaluate these effects to very high degree of accuracy. Also, the odds of the steel fabricator building the structure
with an initial imperfection that exactly resembles one of the buckled mode shapes that GSA has calculated are
pretty small.
We still need to define the length of the waveform Ld and the deflection assumed by the solution code for the
eigenvector at the middle of the waveform xg usually 1.0 for MAX normalization. In the case of the Euler strut, in
mode 1, the length of the buckled waveform is equal to the length of the strut. In mode 2, L is equal to half the
length of the strut, and in mode 3, L is equal to one third of the length of the strut.
In the general case however, it may be more complicated.
54
Second Edition
55
Second Edition
For real structures, when we look at a real buckling mode the first thing that we need to establish is which member,
or members, is it that is a) causing the buckling and b) being affected by the buckling. When we say that a member,
or members, is ‘causing the buckling’ what we mean is that we are assuming that the structure has been built with
an imperfection in that member, or members (that mimics the shape of the buckled mode shape). In the case of the
simple strut in example 1 this means that the strut is initially bowed. In the case of the bracing in example 14 this
means that the bracing members were too long. When we say that a member is ‘affected by’ the buckling we mean
that moments or forces are induced in them, under the normal structural loads, as a result of the imperfection that
the structure was built with. Luckily, our definition of a buckling mode leads to the situation where the two sets of
members (a) and (b) above are generally coincident. A member that the analysis code identifies as having a high
curvature (or extension) becomes the one that has a curvature (or extension) as its initial imperfection. And it is no
coincidence that a member with high curvature (or extension) in the buckled mode is a member that has a high
moment (or axial force) in the force results for that mode. Let us call these members the primary buckling members
for the mode. Spotting the primary buckling members for any given mode is made easier by looking for the
maximum ‘total strain energy density’ in the structure in that mode. The total strain energy density is a value that
the analysis code calculates, and will display, either as a diagram, or as a contoured value. It is, roughly speaking,
defined as moment x curvature (or axial force x axial extension) divided by member area to give an energy density
per meter along the beam. Since the total strain energy density is the product of the two variables that we are most
interested in when we want to find the sets of members (a) and (b) above, it gives us a powerful graphical tool for
highlighting which the primary buckling members are.
56
Second Edition
The resultant forces from each buckled mode can then be combined with the other ultimate forces in the structure
(from the P-∆ analyses) to give sets of design forces for the final stress check. Note that each set of resultant
buckling forces occurs because the structure was (we assume) built with a specific initial imperfection shape
that corresponded to the buckled mode shape. Therefore we do not need to combine forces from one mode
with forces from another since the structure cannot be built into both shapes at the same time.
The sign of q0i should be taken so as to maximize the total response in terms of section utilization. Usually
imperfections in the lowest buckling modes (λcr < 10) will cause the greatest additional response. Several such
modes may need to be considered, each maximizing the utilization of particular sections.
It is sometimes necessary to consider the effect of combining modal imperfections. The following plots show two
mode shapes of the Millennium Wheel. The rim buckles under the compression induced by the prestress in the
spokes. The load factors for the two modes are virtually identical, as are the mode shapes, except they are rotated
such that the position of nodes and antinodes are swapped.
It would be incorrect only to consider imperfections in each mode separately, as this would suggest that the
strength requirement for the rim varies around the circumference. A more general imperfection of the required
magnitude can be obtained by combining the imperfections due to sinα.q02 and cosα.q03. The same amplifier
applies to this combined imperfection, resulting in the same maximum response, except that the maximum can
occur anywhere around the rim. This supports intuition, the rim strength should be constant around the
circumference. Another such example is a long beam on elastic foundations, which has a numerous modes of very
similar shape and load factor. Again, an analysis using a generalized imperfection, based on combined modal
imperfections, would demonstrate that, away from the ends, the beam strength needs to be constant. Such paired or
multiple modes arise because structure and loading have a high degree of symmetry. The Millennium Wheel has
cyclic symmetry and the beam on elastic foundations has longitudinal repetition.
3.1.4.5 Design
It is quite normal to analyze structures assuming they remain linear elastic but then to check the member forces
against plastic capacities. Provided the system is not prone to buckling, partial plasticity causes redistribution of the
forces within the structure but it does not change the overall loading. To be strictly conservative when using linear
buckling analysis, the member forces would need to be limited to the elastic capacities, reduced to allow for the
effects of residual stresses. Codes of practice may allow for this by making the magnitude of the strut imperfection
depend on whether the member is to be checked elastically or plastically. A similar allowance can be made in the
proposed method by increasing the magnitude of the design imperfections.
57
Second Edition
The simplified overall buckling check in BS 5950-Part 1:2000 Clause 4.8.3.3 does not amplify the applied
moments. While this is not conservative, it is usually argued that the effect is small. The more exact approach does
include moment amplification, as does the proposed method.
3.1.4.6 Limitations
The proposed first order analysis method will not be appropriate if the shape of the structure changes significantly
under the applied loading. The classic example would be very shallow arches that flatten under load and are prone
to snap through buckling. The axial force in the arch would be significantly underestimated if calculated on the
basis of the initial geometry, it needs to be calculated based on the reduced curvature of the flattened, loaded arch.
The significance of the effect could be assessed by considering the change in geometry arising from limiting elastic
strain in the arch.
58
Second Edition
3.1.4.7 Methodology
Thus, to perform a linearized elastic buckling analysis, the following procedure is undertaken for each ultimate
state load combination.
(a) P-∆: Apply ultimate limit state load case combination onto the structure (hence the load factors will be
factors upon the ultimate limit state effects). Perform a P-∆ analysis; note two passes required.
(b) Eigenvalue: Perform the linear eigenvalue buckling analysis (two passes required) to obtain the lowest
buckling factor. If λcr1 > 10, then a linear static analysis (no P-∆ effects) may be sufficient.
(c) Modify load case combination to maximize the amplification terms (by minimizing λcr i.e. by
maximizing the geometric stiffness): Modify the load case combination in order to obtain an even
lower buckling factor by maximizing the geometric stiffness matrix. From observation of the critical
buckling mode shape, the loading that contributes to the geometric stiffness can be identified. This
should be maximized to increase the geometric stiffness, and hence obtain the lowest buckling load
factor. For example, for an arch this would mean identifying the load case combination causing the
maximum arch compression and for a column, the maximum axial compression. Again, of course, the
two passes (linear static on KEA and eigenvalue on KEA and KGA) must be performed for the eigenvalue
analysis. Hence the lowest (λcri < 10) buckling load factors and associated mode shapes are obtained.
Amplification terms
(d) Modify load case combination to maximize linear response of critical mode: Modify the load case
combination seeking to maximize the product of the linear response, dependant on the modal force
{φ1}T{f}.
(e) Iteration: Repeat steps 1-4 until the smallest buckling load factors and largest P-∆ response obtained.
(f) Incorporate modal imperfection responses: Calculate the modal imperfection responses as
x0 ry a Ld
q 0i = where x 0 = Ld =
xg y 1000 some constant
Ld
∴ q 0i =
x g . some constant
for every significant mode, i.e. all modes that give rise to significant forces in the structure. This
usually means the modes with λcr of less than 10.
(g) Total physical response: The total physical response will be the summation of the P-∆ case and the
modal imperfection responses (of the significant modes with λcr < 10) in physical coordinates.
Total response = P-∆ response +/- 1/(λcr1-1)q01 x {φ}1
Total response = P-∆ response +/- 1/(λcr2-1)q02 x {φ}2
…
Total response = P-∆ response +/- 1/(λcri-1)q0i x {φ}i
…
… etc … until λcr ~ 10
We do not need to combine forces from one mode with forces from another since the structure cannot
be built into both shapes at the same time. Envelope the results, hence incorporating the imperfections
in all the modes up to λcr ~ 10.
59
Second Edition
(h) Design: Perform local linear elastic (not ULS plastic) capacity checks on the enveloped response. This
then becomes analogous to the code based Perry-Robertson element buckling check applied to global
modes.
Let us look at a real example. The Core Terminal Building roof at Terminal 5, Heathrow, London is not only a very
fine piece of structural engineering and a good example to look at. The model includes 2 rafters and a single pair of
support structures. This frame spans the width of the terminal building and will be repeated 11 times to cover the
length.
The first overall buckling mode looks, at first sight, to be major axis buckling of the rafters (which are prestressed
into compression as well as having an arched shape). It looks as though one goes up and the other goes down, with
each behaving rather like the strut in example 1. However, examination of the strain energy density diagram reveals
that it is the bracing in the roof plane that is the primary buckling member set, rather like example 13. The y
direction sway and the major axis moments in the rafters are secondary effects. The value of Ld has therefore been
taken as the distance between the centres of rotation of the two ends of the roof plane horizontal truss (as observed
from the deflected shape diagram when viewed from above). And xg has been taken as the horizontal deflection of
the centre of the truss relative to its two ends (as defined by those centres of rotation).
The forces predicted by mode 1 are

those that result from the bracing
being installed with incorrect
lengths. They tend to be axial forces
in the bracing, but there are moments
induced in the rafters as well.
The second overall mode could also have been deceptive. The primary buckling members are clearly the main
rafters but what is causing the buckling? One might imagine that the structure was swaying in the east west
direction because of the heavy vertical loads on the legs, as in examples 9 or 10. However a simplified model
showed that the λcrit for that behaviour should be in the region of 40 rather than the value of 6 that the full model
predicts. It turns out that a simple model based on the action displayed in example 11 is a much closer match to the
behaviour of the full model. The rafter itself behaves rather like the strut in example 2, or indeed the beam in
example 11. Therefore the appropriate value of Ld is measured from the end, to the point of contra flexure in the
centre. And xg is taken as the vertical deflection of the rafter ¼ point (this is to avoid an overestimate of xg that
might result if the east west movement were included).
The forces predicted by mode 2 are

caused by incorrect curvature of the
rafters. The primary effect is moment
in the rafters themselves, but there
are also significant axial forces
induced in the support structures.
The third mode is rather like the first in that the primary buckling members are in the roof bracing. In this case the
action is a little more complex structurally. The centre bay of bracing diagonals has been omitted for visual reasons.
60
Second Edition
This means that imperfections in the length of adjacent bracing diagonals have a significant effect, and shear of this
central bay forms the third mode. Again Ld is taken between points of rotation of the roof plane truss and xg has
been measured horizontally.
The forces predicted by mode 3 arise

because of imperfect bracing lengths.
The primary effect is axial in the
bracing, but this mode also causes
some rather inconvenient lateral
moments in the CHSs of the support
structures.
The fourth mode illustrates the need to keep our eyes open. The strain energy density diagram would lead us to
think that the primary buckling members were the roof plane bracing, like in modes 1 and 3. But the deflected
shape, and the bending moment diagram do not fit with this hypothesis. A simplified model confirmed that a
straight rafter in compression would buckle in a very similar shape at a similar λcrit. Therefore we conclude that the
mode is very like example 3. Ld is the length of the centre portion of rafter between the points of contra flexure. xg
is measured vertically, relative to the vertical deflection of the points of contra flexure.
In common with mode 2, the forces

predicted by mode 4 are caused by
incorrect curvature of the rafters. The
primary effect is moment in the
rafters themselves, but there are also
significant axial forces induced in the
support structures.
In addition to these overall modes there are plenty of modes that show buckling of only one part of the structure. In
the case shown below it is the legs that are buckling. If you wanted to, you could use results from this analysis to
check the capacity of the leg CHSs themselves. It would be just as valid, however, and probably much quicker, to
use the code of practice for these sections. In this case Ld and xg would be just what you would expect from looking
at example 1, and so are the forces.
61
Second Edition
3.1.5 MSC.NASTRAN Decks
3.1.5.1 ML, GL Static Analysis
$ EXECUTIVE CONTROL SECTION
SOL 101
$ CASE CONTROL SECTION
DISPLACEMENT(<PRINT,PUNCH,PLOT>) = ALL/<Grid Set ID>

SPCFORCES(<PRINT,PUNCH,PLOT>) = ALL/<Grid Set ID>
OLOAD(<PRINT,PUNCH,PLOT>) = ALL/<Grid Set ID>
ELSTRESS(<PRINT,PUNCH,PLOT>) = ALL/<Element Set ID>
ELFORCE(<PRINT,PUNCH,PLOT>) = ALL/<Element Set ID>
STRAIN(<PRINT,PUNCH,PLOT>) = ALL/<Element Set ID>
ESE(<PRINT,PUNCH,PLOT>) = ALL/<Element Set ID>
LOAD = < ID of FORCEi, MOMENTi, PLOADi, GRAV, LOAD, SPCD Cards in Bulk Data >
TEMP(LOAD) = < ID of TEMP, TEMPRB, TEMPP1 Cards in Bulk Data >
DEFORM = < ID of DEFORM Cards in Bulk Data >
SPC = < ID of SPC Cards in Bulk Data >
The DISPLACEMENT request outputs the displacement vector
The OLOAD request outputs the applied loads vector
The applied loads are reported at the grid points, and include implicitly defined loads such as pressure or gravity.
62
Second Edition
3.1.5.1.1 Applied Loads
FORCE or MOMENT is used to apply a concentrated force or moment at a grid in either the basic or a user-
defined coordinate system.
$ BULK DATA
Grid Scale
FORCE SID CID N1 N2 N3
ID Factor
Grid Scale
MOMENT SID CID N1 N2 N3
ID Factor
To apply a concentrated force or moment at a grid point in or about a vector defined by two arbitrary grid points,
FORCE1 or MOMENT1 is used. To apply a concentrated force at a grid point in or about a vector defined by the
cross product of two vectors defined by four grid points, FORCE2 or MOMENT2 is used.
To define a linearly varying element load on CBAR, CBEAM and CELBOW elements, the PLOAD1 card is used.
$ BULK DATA
PLOAD1 SID EID TYPE SCALE X1 P1 X2 P2
TYPE refers to direction and coordinate system

basic coordinate system FX, FY, FZ, MX, MY, MZ
element coordinate system FXE, FYE, FZE, MXE, MYE, MZE
SCALE refers to either LE which means that the values of Xi are based on actual length of element
or FR which means that the values of Xi are based on fractional distances with the length
of element normalized to 1.0
X1, X2 the distances from end A, bounding the region where the load is applied
P1, P2 the load factors at positions X1, X2
To apply a uniform normal pressure load on CQUAD4, CTRIA3 or CSHEAR surfaces defined by three or four
grids on one or many shell elements, the PLOAD card is used. The direction of the pressure is based on the right
hand rule and the ordering sequence of the grids.
$ BULK DATA
PLOAD SID Pressure G1 G2 G3 G4
To apply uniform normal pressure load on CQUAD4, CTRIA3 or CSHEAR using element ids, the PLOAD2 card
is used. The direction of the pressure is based on the right hand rule and the element grid definition order.
$ BULK DATA
PLOAD2 SID Pressure EID1 EID2 THRU EID77 EID89 EID97
To apply a linearly varying not necessarily normal pressure load (such as hydrostatic pressure) on a surface of
any two or three-dimensional elements, the PLOAD4 card is used.
Note that point loads and moments on 1D elements are independent of the geometry of the element. Pressure loads
(applied in stress units) on 2D and 3D elements are dependent upon the dimensions of the loaded face of the
element. Line edge loads (applied in stress units) on 2D elements are dependent upon the thickness and the
dimension of the loaded edge.
63
Second Edition
To apply acceleration forces on elements (such as force due to gravitational or centripetal acceleration), the GRAV
card is used. The GRAV card is used to simulate a load resulting from the inertia of the component of system.
Gravity may be one example. Another example may be the acceleration induced in a car component when the car
accelerates. The inertia of the component will resist the acceleration and hence produce a force in the same way as
it resists gravitational acceleration. Likewise, a centrifugal acceleration load allows rotating systems to be evaluated
statically.
$ BULK DATA
Scale
GRAV SID CID N1 N2 N3 MB
Factor
The force due to acceleration is calculated by multiplying the mass matrix with the acceleration specified. To
specify a gravitational acceleration of 9.81 m/s2, with the scale factor equaling 1.0, N3 = −9.81, with the vertical
direction being the global Z direction. The mass definition is defined by the density on a material entry.
The GRAV card cannot have the same ID as other static load types. Hence, a load combination must be specified
using the LOAD bulk data entry with the ID equal to that specified by the LOAD card in the Case Control Section.
The LOAD bulk data entry can be used to combine FORCEi, MOMENTi, PLOADi, GRAV, and SPCD cards.
$ BULK DATA
Overall
LOAD SID Scale S1 L1 S2 L2 S3 L3
Factor
S4 L4 …etc…
64
Second Edition
3.1.5.1.2 Enforced Displacement
There are two methods available for specifying an enforced displacement at a component. The first method is to
enter the value of the enforced displacement directly on an SPC entry. The alternate method to enforce a
displacement at a component is to use the SPCD Bulk Data entry. The SPCD entry is actually a force, not a
constraint, but it is used in conjunction with an SPC entry to enforce the displacement. When you use an SPCD
entry, internal forces are computed that are applied to the structure to produce the desired enforced displacements.
To specify a static enforced displacement at grid points, the SPCD card may be used.
$ BULK DATA
SPCD SID G1 C1 D1 G2 C2 D2
Grid points with an enforced displacement using the SPCD entry must also appear on an SPC or an SPC1 Bulk
Data entry. The SPCD method of enforcing a nonzero constraint is more efficient than using an SPC entry alone
when you are using multiple subcases that specify different constraint conditions. Note also that when you use an
SPCD entry, the displacement values entered on the SPC entry are ignored-only the SPCD values are used.
3.1.5.1.3 Lack-of-Fit
To specify a lack-of-fit or vice versa on line elements, the DEFORM card can be used.
$ BULK DATA
DEFORM SID EID D1 EID2 D2 EID3 D3
A positive deformation D1 refers to elongation and a negative D1 refers to a contraction (lack-of-fit). When using
the DEFORM entry, you must remember that in general you are not enforcing a strain or an actual extensional
length to the element. What you are doing is applying a force to the element that produces the specified extension if
the element is free to expand without internal forces being generated. This computed force is added to the other
forces in the model. Since most elements in your model are not free to expand, the extension value you specify may
not be achieved.
3.1.5.1.4 Prestressed Member
The prestress is an element (such as a prestressed cable) can be modeled using temperature loads. The axial force
generated from applying the temperature load on a line element that is totally fixed at its nodes can be calculated as
follows,
faxial = EAδ/L
faxial = EAεstrainL/L
faxial = EAεstrain
where εstrain = α ∆T, α is the coefficient of thermal expansion (per °C) and ∆T is the change in temperature in °C.
Note that the loads induced by the temperature are independent of the length of the element, L.
However, it must be realized that the force calculated above is based on a fixed end line element. In reality and in
the numerical model, the ends will in general not be fixed. Hence the element will contract with tensile temperature
loading causing the force to decrease. Thus the specified ∆T will have to correspond to a force which is greater
than the intended final prestress. Hence an iterative procedure is required (hence the need to perform the analysis
repeatedly) until the required prestress is achieved in the final deflected configuration.
65
Second Edition
3.1.5.1.5 Thermal Expansion or Contraction
Thermal expansion and contraction is a structural rather than a thermal solution i.e. it is the analysis of stress and
displacement due to thermal effects that is being considered, not the temperature at a point in the structure, which
requires a heat transfer analysis. In fact, a heat transfer analysis can actually be used to generate the temperature
profile and distribution and these results can in turn be applied as temperature loads in a thermal stress analysis.
The input data required for analyzing thermal expansion is the coefficient of thermal expansion and the temperature
distribution in model. The temperature data and the thermal expansion coefficients (in the material entry cards) are
used internally to calculate equivalent forces and moments acting at grid points. Temperatures can be specified at
grid point using TEMP cards, or at elements using TEMPRB (line elements) or TEMPP1 (shell elements).
Average temperature specified directly for an element will take precedence over the temperature interpolated from
the elements connected grid points. Solid elements get their temperature only by interpolation from connected grid
points. Temperature load is calculated for a fixed ended member as
faxial = EAεstrain
where εstrain = α ∆T, α is the coefficient of thermal expansion (per °C) and ∆T is the change in temperature in °C
This equivalent nodal load is only attained if the element is constrained from expanding and contracting. Note that
the loads induced by the temperature are independent of the length of the element, L. However, if the elements is
not constrained from expanding and contracting, then there will be a lateral deflection of faxial/k = faxial/(EA/L) =
EAεstrain/(EA/L) = εstrainL which clearly is dependent upon the length of the element, L. Temperature loads are
defined as follows.

TEMP(INIT) = < ID of TEMP, TEMPD, TEMPP1, TEMPRB, TEMPF or TEMPAX Bulk Data Say 99 >
TEMP(LOAD) = < ID of TEMP, TEMPD, TEMPP1, TEMPRB, TEMPF or TEMPAX Bulk Data Say 1 >
$ BULK DATA
ID Temperature
TEMPD
Say 99 0.0
ID Temperature
TEMPD
Say 1 0.0
ID
TEMPRB EID1 TA TB
Say 1
EID2 THRU EID100 EID200 THRU EID300
TEMPD is to define temperatures at all grid points not given a temperature. It is good practice to define these and
the initial nodal temperatures. TA and TB are the variations of temperature ∆T from the reference temperature
defined by TEMP (INIT).
Note also that SUBCOM cannot be used conventionally to combine temperature load cases. The following
procedure is required. SUBCOM 3 combines the mechanical loads of load cases 1 and 2, but not their temperature
loads. Temperature loads must thus be specified separately calling a separate TEMPi bulk data entry card, which
can be made to combine the temperature loads of the load cases 1 and 2.

SUBCOM 3
SUBSEQ = 1.0, 0.5 $ 1.0 x subcase 1 + 0.5 subcase 2
TEMP(LOAD) = < ID of TEMP, TEMPD, TEMPP1, TEMPRB, TEMPF or TEMPAX Bulk Data >
66
Second Edition
3.1.5.1.6 Linear Contact Definition with MPC Equations for SOL 101
Contact definitions (normal to contacting surfaces, no sliding friction) can be made within a linear static analysis
(albeit using an iterative method). RBE2 elements can be defined between adjacent grids of surfaces, then a linear
static analysis performed, then the RBE2s in tension deleted (as a contact cannot sustain tension), further linear
static analyses performed and further RBE2 elements deleted until there are no RBE2 elements in tension within
the contact interface. Although this method works, it is extremely cumbersome, as every load case will have a
different contact distribution. This process can be automated far more elegantly using MPC equations in SOL 101.
It uses a iterative constraint type approach. The constraints are applied to grid points or SPOINTS. The constraint
ensures that:
1. The displacement (UR) cannot be negative. This is to ensure that there is no penetration. Therefore, the
chosen degree-of-freedom must be perpendicular to the contact surface and positive in the opening direction.
2. The force of constraint (QR) cannot be negative. This is to ensure that there is no tension.
The constraints are satisfied by an iterative technique that is built into SOL 101. The iterative process starts with a
random vector. This random vector assumes certain grids to be in contact and other grids to be in an open state. A
solution is obtained when all the gap constraints are satisfied, i.e., there's no penetration and no tension forces. If a
limit cycle (return to a previous state) is detected during the iterations, a new random start vector is tried. This
approach provides an alternate method to the use of GAP elements in SOL 106. Some experiments have shown that
the cost of analysis will be about the same. The advantage is that you do not have to learn how to calculate the GAP
stiffness nor how to control SOL 106. Multiple load conditions are allowed, and each will be solved separately. If
the constraint is between a finite element model and a fixed boundary, then arrange to have one of the degrees-of-
freedom at the boundary grid points represent motion perpendicular to the boundary. A positive displacement
represents motion away from the boundary. If, on the other hand, the constraint represents relative motion between
two bodies, MPC equations are needed to define a relative motion degree-of-freedom, which is then constrained to
have a non-negative displacement. Consider the following contact interface between two faces of the FE model
UG1 UG2
Positive U Direction
S0
The MPC for each and every pair of grids is defined as
S = UG2 – UG1 + S0
where S is the relative motion DOF, UG2 – UG1 arranged such that a positive value indicates opening of the contact
and S0 representing the initial gap opening, zero if the model interface gap is zero. The MPC is rearranged
S – UG2 + UG1 – S0 = 0 To model a fixed contact interface between a surface of the FE model and
for the definition of the card. a fixed boundary, simply omit U to represent a fixed boundary.
G1

MPCFORCES(<PRINT,PUNCH,PLOT>) = ALL
MPC = < ID of MPC Cards in Bulk Data, Say 1 >
$ BULK DATA
PARAM, CDITER, < Number of Iterations Allowed For Convergence >
PARAM, CDPRT, YES (Requests printing of constraint violations during iterations)
1 S 0 G2 U
MPC (Relative Motion (SPOINT 1.0 (G2 -1.0
(MPC ID) (G2 ID)
SPOINT ID) Component) Component)
G1 U S0 0
(G1 ID)
(G1 1.0 (Initial Gap (SPOINT -1.0
Component) SPOINT ID) Component)
S 0
(Relative
SUPORT Motion
(SPOINT
Component)
SPOINT ID)
67
Second Edition
S
(Relative
S0
SPOINT (Initial Gap
Motion
SPOINT ID) SPOINT ID)
PARAM, CDPRT requests the printing of constraint violations (in terms of UR for negative displacements
denoting overlap and QR denoting negative forces of constraints) during the iterations. The output is as follows.
Negative Force in Constraint
At the end of the third

iteration, 1 change still
required
PARAM, CDITER specifies

No more iteration required, QR and UR satisfied
after 4 iterations, i.e. after 4 static analyses.
The number of changes (to the constraints) required at the end of each iteration is denoted by CHANGES and
gradually will reduce until zero. At this stage, the contact interface is defined for the particular load case and all the
linear GAP constraints satisfy both QR and UR. It must be checked that the CHANGES reduce to ZERO,
otherwise the solution has not converged! PARAM, CDITER should be increased until convergence is achieved.
NASTRAN will adopt the results of the final iteration irrespective of whether the solution has converged or not!
Once convergence has been achieved, it is illustrative to find out the pairs of grids (or rather the SPOINT defining
their relative motion) that are SHUT, i.e. in contact. This is indicated as follows.
Relative motion SPOINT ID and 1.0E+0 indicating the

contact is SHUT, i.e. in contact.
Finally, the intention would be to find out the value of the constraint forces. This is best found from MPCFORCES
(PRINT) from the G TYPE Grid output. S TYPE SPOINT forces also correspond.
Force on one of the grids (note G TYPE) of the contact grid

pair. One grid will show a positive value, and the other a
Relative motion negative value. If the FE surface contacts a fixed boundary,
SPOINT force. Initial gap
SPOINT force. then there will only be one grid MFC (G TYPE) output.
The same values are also presented in the SPCFORCES output (only for SPOINTS), somewhat redundantly.
Also note that large non-zero values for EPSILON

Relative motion Initial gap and strain energy for the SUPORT degree of freedom
SPOINT force. SPOINT force. can be safely ignored, as we are not performing
inertia relief analysis.
68
Second Edition
3.1.5.1.7 Modelling Centrifugal Force in SOL 101– Modelling Steady State Static Equilibrium Conditions
Centrifugal force is applied onto systems assumed to be in a steady-state, equivalent to static equilibrium. For
instance, the forces acting on a car spinning in a test track at a certain velocity and/or acceleration can be
ascertained using linear static analysis with centrifugal force as the system is in static equilibrium. Likewise the
forces in components rotating in a rotating drum can be ascertained. The six rigid-body boundary conditions must
of course still be applied onto the static system. The RFORCE entry is used to apply the force due to rotational
velocity and/or acceleration. On the RFORCE entry, the components of a spin vector used internally to compute
centrifugal forces are input. Each component of the spin vector is multiplied by the same scale factor. For instance
consider the two rotating masses shown below. The masses are accelerated at constant angular acceleration of 20
rev/sec2 from 0 to 200 rev/min. The goal is to determine the CBAR axial force as a function of angular velocity.
SPC
From graph, note that centrifugal forces are not linear with angular velocity, but proportional to ω2. Hence, using
a SUBCOM command to scale the subcases with RFORCE entries can lead to misleading results if abused.
The force of a single rotating part out-of-balance is

F( t ) = F0 sin (Ωt )
where the amplitude is
4π 2 2
F0 = m.e. .n
3600
= m.e.4π 2 .f B2
= m.e.Ω 2
where
F0 = centrifugal force (N)
m = mass of the rotating part (unbalanced fraction) (kg)
e = eccentricity of the unbalanced mass fraction (m)
n = rate of rotation (speed of revolution of the unbalanced mass expressed in rev per minute) (r.p.m.)
fB = operating frequency (fB = n/60) (Hz)
Ω = angular velocity of the rotating part (=2πfB) (rad/s)
Another interesting note is that the model really does not rotate; it is actually fixed at the center. If the constraints
permitted the model to rotate, the run would fail. RFORCE is called by the LOAD case control command.
$ BULK DATA
Velocity Scale
Grid
RFORCE SID CID Factor A = R1 R2 R3 METHOD
ID
...rev/s
Acceleration
Scale Factor
RACC = 20rev/s2
69
Second Edition
Method=1 yields correct results only when there is no coupling in the mass matrix. This occurs when the lumped
mass option is used with or without the ZOFFS option (see the CQUAD4 entry for a description of ZOFFS).
Method=2 yields correct results for lumped or consistent mass matrix only if the ZOFFS option is not used. The
acceleration terms due to the mass offset (X1, X2, X3) on the CONM2 entry are not computed with method=2. The
possible combinations are
In addition, for problems with elements that have edge grid points (CQUAD8, CTRIA6, CTRlAX6, CHEXA,
CPENTA, and CTETRA), correct centrifugal loads are produced only if the parameter PARAM, COUPMASS, x
(where x is greater than 1), is included and Method 2 is used.
70
Second Edition
3.1.5.2 GL, ML P-∆ (KGA From KEA) Static Analysis
In order to perform a P-∆ static analysis, the geometric stiffness matrix must be calculated. However, because the
geometric stiffness matrix is dependent upon the state of element stresses (or the forces in the elements), it is
necessary to perform a static analysis without the geometric stiffness as a first pass, and then only perform another
static analyses incorporating the geometric stiffness matrix. The following procedure can be adopted.
Phase 1
Perform static analysis (with loads that cause the greatest negative or positive geometric stiffness) based on [KEA]
but include the segyroa.v2001 alter prior to the Case Control Section in order to compute the geometric stiffness
matrix [KGA] (and output into a .pch file) based on the generated element loads from the [KEA] static analysis.
Phase 2
Perform static analysis with a general loading function based on [KEA] + [KGA] by including the k2gg = ktjj
statement in the Case Control Section and the outputted .pch file which contains the ktjj matrix in the Bulk Data.
The responses at this stage represent the P-∆ (KGA From KEA) static response to the general loading function.
The method is valid when only the prestress is judged to affect the geometric stiffness such as in the
compressive preload of building columns due to gravitational loads and the prestressing of extremely taut cables
that sag very little under gravity but not in systems such as suspension bridges. Where lateral loads are large
enough to affect the geometry of the system with prestress, then a repetitive P-∆, SOL 106, implicit dynamic
relaxation SOL 129 or explicit dynamic relaxation must be employed. But in single P-∆ analysis, because cables do
not have much elastic bending stiffness, the initial static preload subcase should only include the prestress and not
gravity as including gravity is the same as solving two linear static problems of stiffness KEA with preload and
gravity as the applied loads respectively. Clearly, in the gravity case, it is nonsensical as the cables do in reality
have differential stiffness (from the prestress) to resist the gravitational force. Prestress in one direction (i.e. along
the axis of cable) will cause a differential stiffness in the orthogonal direction. Gravity acts in the orthogonal
direction and hence cannot be accounted for in the calculation of the prestress in this single P-∆ analysis. To
quantitatively decide if gravity need not be considered in contributing to the differential stiffness of the cables, a
static P-∆ analysis should be carried out, the first subcase being a SOL 101 with only the prestress as applied loads
and the second subcase a P-∆ SOL 101 (i.e. utilizing the induced prestress from the first subcase to form a
geometric stiffness matrix) with both the gravity and prestress included as applied loads. If the difference in the
cable element forces between subcases 1 and 2 is negligible, then gravity has little influence in affecting the
geometric stiffness. If there is a major difference in the cable element force, then clearly, gravity will affect the
geometric stiffness and as such, a repetitive P-∆ , SOL 106, implicit dynamic relaxation or explicit dynamic
relaxation must be used to converge to the true KT. Likewise, in the single P-∆ analysis of multi-storey buildings,
gravity (and only gravity) acts in axis of columns to generate prestress, and the differential stiffness is computed for
the orthogonal direction reducing resistance to lateral wind forces, applied in the second subcase with gravity too.
The segyroa.v2001 alter computes the differential stiffness due to the prestress and also the follower force. The
follower force is calculated and incorporated by the use of PARAM, FOLLOWK, YES. We know how the prestress
affects the differential stiffness, namely a tensile prestress causing an increase in stiffness. The effect of the follower
force on the stiffness is different. For example, for a cylinder under external pressure critical buckling load may be over-
estimated (even though the mode shapes are similar) in a SOL 105 and the natural frequencies in vibration may be under-
estimated (even though the mode shapes are similar) in a SOL 103 in the absence of follower stiffness. To the contrary,
this observations are reversed in case of centrifugal loads. Centrifugal forces as a constant (static) load are applied by a
Bulk Data RFORCE to any elements that have masses. The follower stiffness due to centrifugal load has the effect of
lowering stiffness (although the centrifugal load tensioning effect increases stiffness), consequently lowering natural
frequencies (even though the mode shapes are similar) in a SOL 103 and lowering the buckling loads (even though the
mode shapes are similar) in a SOL 105. This effect increases as the RPM increases, and it becomes significant when the
RPM is over 1000.
71
Second Edition
3.1.5.3 GL, ML P-∆ (KGA From Exact or Approximate KTA) Static Analysis
To obtain KTA, to be theoretically exact, a GNL SOL 106 (or implicit dynamic relaxation SOL 129 or explicit
dynamic relaxation LS-DYNA) with prestress (as temperature loads say) and gravity must be undertaken.
Alternatively, an approximation to KTA can be obtained by repetitive P-∆ static analyses with the prestress (as
temperature loads say) and gravity applied. The procedure to obtain this approximate KTA will be presented. Note
that the approximate KTA will be the summation of the elastic stiffness KE at the undeflected (by the prestress and
gravity) state but KG at the deflected (by the prestress and gravity) state. Hence if KE changes considerably during
the application of the prestress, a full SOL 106 (or implicit dynamic relaxation SOL 129 or explicit dynamic
relaxation LS-DYNA), which converges to the KE and KG at the deflected (by the prestress and gravity) state
should be employed. Hence for the modelling of a suspension bridge where there is a great change in geometry
(known in the bridge industry as form-finding, so-called because it is necessary to find the form or shape of the
catenary suspension cables), it may be prudent to employ SOL 106 (or implicit dynamic relaxation SOL 129 or
explicit dynamic relaxation LS-DYNA), but for a high tension low sag cable on say a tower with prestressed
cables, the repetitive P-∆ static analysis may be adequate. The repetitive P-∆ analysis basically involves a number
of iterations of linear static analyses to obtain an approximate KTA. Note again that A refers to the initial
undeflected (by the collapsing load) state, but deflected by the prestress and gravity. To perform the repetitive P-∆
analysis, a static analysis is performed based on KEA with temperature loads and gravity to generate forces in the
structural elements, which in turn provides input for the computation of KGiAKTm where m is the iterations.
Repetitive static analysis is performed with the prestress and gravity updating the stiffness matrix KEA + KGiAKTm-1 +
KGiAKTm until convergence of displacements is obtained. The tangent stiffness at this stage is the approximate
converged tangent stiffness matrix KTA = KEA + KGiAKT. The converged displacements represent the approximate P-
∆ (KGA From Approximate KTA) static response to the initial prestress loads. The converged geometric stiffness at
this stage would be that based upon the approximate tangent stiffness matrix KTA, i.e. KGiAKT.
Phase 1
Perform static analysis (with prestress and gravity) based on [KEA] but include the segyroa.v2001 alter prior to the
Case Control Section in order to compute the geometric stiffness matrix [KGA]1 (and output into a .pch file) based
on the generated element loads from the [KEA] static analysis.
Phase 2
Perform static analysis (with prestress and gravity) based on [KEA] + [KGA]1 by including the k2gg = ktjj statement
in the Case Control Section, the outputted .pch file which contains the ktjj matrix in the Bulk Data and the
segyroa.v2001 alter prior to the Case Control Section to compute the [KGA]2 (and output into the .pch file
overwriting previous data) based on the generated element loads from the [KEA] + [KGA]1 static analysis.
Phase 3
Repeatedly perform the Phase 2 static analysis (with prestress and gravity) based on [KEA] + [KGA]i for i = 2 to n
where n represents the number of iterations required for the change in deflections between analyses to become
negligible. This would signify that the change in the [KGA] matrix become negligible and the correct [KGA] is
attained. The deflections and the other responses at this stage represent the P-∆ (KGA From Approximate KTA) static
response to the prestress and gravity. The stiffness of the structure is KTA.
Phase 4
The P-∆ response to a general loading function can now be ascertained by performing a P-∆ static analysis with the
converged tangent stiffness of the structure, KTA. The responses at this stage represent the P-∆ (KGA From
Approximate KTA) response to the general loading function.
72
Second Edition
3.1.6 Hand Methods Verification
3.1.6.1 Static Displacements by the Unit Load Method of the Virtual Work Principle
P ∆ = f δ expresses virtual work i.e. external work = internal work

P’∆ = f ’δ expresses the load method where
P’ = virtual external action, specified usually as unity for the unit load method
∆ = real external kinematic, the item to be found
f ’ = virtual internal action, due to the virtual external actions P’
δ = real internal kinematic, due to the real external actions on the structure
1’∆ = f1’δ expresses the unit load method
1’∆1 = f1’δ1 represents the unit load method with the real external actions also unity i.e. both the virtual external
actions and real external actions are unity
∆ 1 = external real kinematic due to unit external real action
= f1 ' δ 1
 M1   P1  P L  T1   V1 Q 
= ∫ (M )1 V
 ds  +
 EI  R
∫ (P )1 V
 ds  or (P1 ) V  1  +
 EA  R  EA  R
∫ (T )
1 V
 ds  +
 GK t  R
∫ (V )
1 V
 ds 
 GIb  R
   
 P1spring   M 1spring   T1spring 
(
+ P1spring ) 
V 
(
 + M 1spring )
V
 (
 + T1spring )
V
 
 k spring R  k rotational   k torsional 
 spring R  spring R
M1 P PL T VQ P1sp M 1sp T1sp
= M1 ∫ EI ∫
EA EA GK t GIb∫
ds + P1 1 ds or P1 1 + T1 1 ds + V1 1 ds + P1sp
k sp ∫
+ M 1sp
k rot sp
+ T1sp
k tor sp
The integrals can be evaluated using classical calculus integration methods, product integrals or using the
numerical Simpson’s Rule I = h/3[f0+4f1+f2]. Simpson’s Rule is exact for the multiplication of continuous functions
up to and including cubic variations. Non-continuous piecewise functions should be split at the discontinuities and
integrated in sections.
73
Second Edition
74
Second Edition
75
Second Edition
3.1.6.2 BMD and SFD of Structures of Low Static Indeterminacies by Flexibility Analysis
The flexibility analysis is performed as follows
(i) Determine the degree of static indeterminacy αs

(ii) Choose αs shear force, bending moment, external force or external moment releases to form the
released statically determinates structure
(iii) Evaluate response of the released structure to the real external loads, m0, p0, t0
(iv) Evaluate responses of released structure (in the absence of real loads) to unit values of the releases in
turn, m1, m2 … mα , p1, p2 … pα , t1, t2 … tα
Note that releasing an internal bending moment or shear force constitutes the release of an internal bi-
action whilst the release of an external moment or force constitutes only a single action.
(v) Set up and solve the compatibility equations simultaneously
f10 + X1f11 + X2f12 + … + Xα f1α = 0
f20 + X1f21 + X2f22 + … + Xα f2α = 0
…………………………………….
fα0 + X1fα1 + X2fα2 + … + Xα fαα = 0
where fij is the displacement due to virtual action i and real kinematic j.
(vi) The internal bending moments, shear forces and torsional moments of the statically indeterminate
structure are then given by
m = m0 + X1m1 + X2m2 + … + Xαmα
p = p0 + X1p1 + X2p2 + … + Xαpα
t = t0 + X1t1 + X2t2 + … + Xαtα
76
Second Edition
77
Second Edition
78
Second Edition
79
Second Edition
80
Second Edition
81
Second Edition
82
Second Edition
83
Second Edition
84
Second Edition
85
Second Edition
86
Second Edition
87
Second Edition
88
Second Edition
89
Second Edition
90
Second Edition
91
Second Edition
92
Second Edition
93
Second Edition
94
Second Edition
95
Second Edition
96
Second Edition
97
Second Edition
3.1.6.3 Bending Moments, Shear Force, and Displacements of Structural Elements by the Stiffness Method
The flexural stiffness relations for a beam element gives the relationships between the actions shear force &
bending moment and the kinematics displacements and rotations.
Beam With Both Ends Fixed
Same End of Beam Opposite End of Beam
Bending Moment / Rotation 4EI/L 2EI/L
Shear Force / Translation 12EI/L3 −12EI/L3

Bending Moment / Translation
±6EI/L2
or Shear Force / Rotation
Beam With One End Fixed And The Other Pinned
Bending Moment / Rotation 3EI/L 0
Shear Force / Translation 3EI/L3 −3EI/L3

Bending Moment / Translation ±3EI/L2 but no force (hence stiffness) generated by rotation of pinned end
or Shear Force / Rotation and no moments generated at pinned end due to other kinematics
Beam With Both Ends Pinned
Bending Moment / Rotation 0 0
Shear Force / Translation 0 0

Bending Moment / Translation
0
or Shear Force / Rotation
The force-displacement relationship of the Timoshenko beam is as follows. For the Euler-Bernoulli beam, β is
zero.
 F1   12 6L − 12 6L   δ1 
M   (4 + β)L 2
− 6L (2 − β )L   θ1 
2 
 1 EI  6L 12EI
 = 3   β=
 F2  L (1 + β ) − 12 − 6L 12 − 6 L  δ 2  GAL2
 
M 2   6L (2 − β) − 6L (4 + β )L2  θ 2 
98
Second Edition
3.1.6.4 Bending Moments and Shear Force of Structures of Low Kinematic Indeterminacies by Moment
Distribution
Fixed end forces due to distributed loading is −/+ωL2/8 and that due to a mid point load is −/+PL/8. The drop-down
due to distributed loading is ωL2/8 and that due to a point load is PL/4. The distribution factors summary is as
follows
Location Distribution Factor

Kinematic DOF Stiffness Ratio
Kinematic Fixity Nothing
Pinned End 1
Cantilever 1:0
The analysis of a structure with kinematic indeterminacy αk = 1 is exact, and those with αk > 1 is iterative. The
kinematic indeterminacies are reduced by
(a) changing moment/rotational stiffness of pinned end beam to 3EI/L from 4EL/L, hence eliminating the pinned
ended kinematic
(b) employing symmetry and anti-symmetry of structure and loading as follows
(i) axis of symmetry through a joint and symmetric loading
φcentre = 0, hence analyze half structure with equivalent central rotational fixity
(ii) axis of symmetry through a joint and anti-symmetric loading
BMcenter = 0, hence analyze half structure with equivalent central pinned end
(iii) axis of symmetry through a member and symmetric loading
analyze half structure with the stiffness of middle member of 2EI/L
(iv) axis of symmetry through a member and anti-symmetric loading
analyze half structure with the stiffness of middle member of 6EI/L
Hence, the analysis of pinned ended two-span continuous beams and propped cantilever is exact.
Beam and External Load Effects Bending Deflection

Simply supported beam uniformly loaded w Mmid = wL2/8 δ = 5wL4 / (384EI)
Simply supported beam mid-span point load P Mmid = PL/4 δ = PL3 / (48EI)
Cantilever uniformly loaded w Mfixed-end = wL2/2 δ = wL4 / (8EI)
Cantilever free-end point load P Mfree-end = PL δ = PL3 / (3EI)
Fixed-ended beam (both sides) uniformly loaded w Mfixed-end = wL2/12 δ = wL4 / (384EI)
Mmid = wL2/24
Fixed-ended beam (both sides) mid-span point load P Mfixed-end = PL/8 δ = PL3 / (192EI)
Mmid = PL/8
Propped cantilever uniformly loaded w Mfixed-end = wL2/8 δsag = wL4 / (185EI)
Msag = 9wL2/128
Propped cantilever mid-span point load P Mfixed-end = 3PL/16 δsag = 0.00932PL3/EI
Msag = 5PL/32
99
Second Edition
100
Second Edition
101
Second Edition
102
Second Edition
103
Second Edition
104
Second Edition
105
Second Edition
106
Second Edition
107
Second Edition
108
Second Edition
109
Second Edition
110
Second Edition
111
Second Edition
112
Second Edition
113
Second Edition
114
Second Edition
115
Second Edition
116
Second Edition
117
Second Edition
118
Second Edition
119
Second Edition
120
Second Edition
121
Second Edition
122
Second Edition
3.1.6.5 Summary of Deflections and Effects
123
Second Edition
124
Second Edition
125
Second Edition
126
Second Edition
127
Second Edition
128
Second Edition
129
Second Edition
130
Second Edition
131
Second Edition
132
Second Edition
133
Second Edition
134
Second Edition
135
Second Edition
136
Second Edition
137
Second Edition
138
Second Edition
139
Second Edition
140
Second Edition
141
Second Edition
142
Second Edition
143
Second Edition
144
Second Edition
145
Second Edition
146
Second Edition
147
Second Edition
148
Second Edition
149
Second Edition
150
Second Edition
151
Second Edition
152
Second Edition
153
Second Edition
154
Second Edition
155
Second Edition
156
Second Edition
157
Second Edition
158
Second Edition
159
Second Edition
160
Second Edition
161
Second Edition
162
Second Edition
163
Second Edition
3.1.6.6 Member Buckling Check Using The P-∆ Method To Incorporate Imperfections, Residual Stresses
3.1.6.6.1 ML, GL (P-∆ Based) Perry-Robertson Buckling of Column (Primary Stress is Only Axial)
Elements With Imperfections and Residual Stresses
Euler buckling considers only the axial stresses with no provisions for bending stresses. Hence, it is only valid for
perfectly straight columns. Perry-Robertson on the other hand includes the decrease in capacity due to initial
imperfections of the column. It is based upon finding the mean axial stress that will cause the onset of yielding of
extreme fibers due to the combined effects of both axial stresses and longitudinal bending stresses. Hence Perry-
Robertson implicitly includes yielding of the column at low slenderness ratios. It can be shown starting from the
basic equation for the onset of outer fiber yielding (utilizing the amplification factor derived in Section 3.1.2, hence
the reason it is called buckling by the P-∆ method)
   
PPR M  1  Px 0  1 
+   = σy i.e. σ PR +   = σy
A Z  1 − PPR  Z  1 − PPR 
 PE  PE 
 
that the Perry-Robertson buckling capacity stress is
σ y + (1 + η )σ E  σ y + (1 + η)σ E 
2
Ax 0 x 0 y x 0 y
σ PR = −   − σyσE where the Perry factor, η = = 2 =
2  2  Z r r r
The Perry factor η above is the theoretical imperfection factor which is dependent upon the initial eccentricity,
x0 and also the cross sectional properties. But BS 5950-Part 1:2000 goes a step further and requires an increase in
the Perry factor due to residual stresses from rolling and welding. It thus states that the Perry factor should be
a (L e − L o )
η= a = Robertson constant
1000 ry
The Robertson constant, a divided by 1000, i.e. a/1000 is equivalent to (x0/L)(y/r) and includes the initial
imperfection, the section shape and also residual stresses. The Lo plateau is introduced so that for a very low
slenderness, the strut reaches its full yield capacity. As an aside, note that although the radius of gyration of an area
has no physical meaning, we can consider it to be the distance (from the reference axis) at which the entire area
could be concentrated and still have the same moment of inertia as the original area.
Note that σPR approaches σE for large slenderness ratios i.e. for very slender columns; This means that the
sensitivity of slender columns to imperfections is less than that of stocky columns.
σ cr
σ cr = σ y
σy
σ cr = σ E
σ cr = σ PR
Le
r
Le π2E
=
r σy
164
Second Edition
The capacity to buckling should be checked about both the major and minor axes. The slenderness is a function
of the cross section and the boundary conditions, hence the critical buckling capacity may occur about either the
major or minor axes. The critical load capacity is
PPR = σ PR A
Column Buckling Check BS 5950-Part 1:2000 cl. 4.7.4

Allocation of strut curve = f (section type, max thickness, axis of buckling) Table 23
Compressive strength, pc, smaller of pcxx = f(py,λxx) and pcyy = f(py,λyy) (N/mm2) Table 24
Slenderness, λxx = LExx / rxx and λyy = LEyy / ryy
Effective length, LExx and LEyy Table 22
Ensure F/(Apc) < 1 for Class 1, 2 and 3 sections cl. 4.7.4
Note that for welded I, H or box sections, pc should be obtained from Table 24 or calculated using a py value
lessened by 20 N/mm2. A fundamental parameter is the effective length, LE.
165
Second Edition
Another method used to determine LE in buildings given in BS 5950-Part 1:2000 is based on the adjacent member
stiffnesses to determine coefficient k1 and k2 from which design charts are used to determine LE for sway and non-
sway frames.
Non-Sway Sway
166
Second Edition
The choice of strut curve is defined by Table 23 as follows.
The pc of Table 24 can be calculated as
where
and the Perry factor, η
in which the limiting slenderness λ0 is
and the Robertson constant, a is defined as follows
167
Second Edition
168
Second Edition
On top of the Perry-Robertson flexural buckling, columns are also subject to torsional buckling and flexural-
torsional buckling. These occur when the ratio of torsional to flexural stiffness is very much reduced.
169
Second Edition
3.1.6.6.2 ML, GL (P-∆ Based) Secant Buckling of Column (Primary Stress is Axial) Elements With
Eccentric Loading, Initial Imperfections and Residual Stresses
The Secant buckling stress for an eccentrically (with eccentricity e) loaded column is as follows. It is based upon
finding the mean axial stress that will cause the onset of yielding of extreme fibers due to the combined effects of
both axial stresses and longitudinal bending stresses, the latter of which is primarily a result of the eccentricity of
the axial load. The initial imperfections and residual stresses can also be added to the loading eccentricity, e for an
equivalent eccentricity, e.
σy
σ SECANT =
ec L σ SECANT 
1 + 2 sec  e
r  2r E 
 
The equation is an implicit formula, and hence iteration is required to solve for σSECANT. Note that the radius of
gyration, r is the minor axis radius of gyration. Also, c denotes the distance from the neutral axis to the extreme
fibre on the concave or compression side of the bent column. The term ec/r2 is called the eccentric ratio, a value
which is often calibrated to physical tests. In fact, it is the same as the Perry factor, η had there been no eccentricity
of the loading. Typical conventional design of structural steel columns employs a value of 0.25 for ec/r2.
170
Second Edition
3.1.6.6.3 ML, GL (P-∆ Based) Lateral-Torsional Buckling of Beam (Primary Stress is Only Bending)
Elements With Imperfections and Residual Stresses
A critical parameter is the effective length, LE and is defined in clauses cl. 4.3.5.1 to cl. 4.3.5.5 for
simple beams without intermediate lateral restraints (Table 13),

simple beams with intermediate lateral restraints (1.0LLT normal loads or 1.2LLT destabilizing loads),
beams with double curvature bending,
cantilever beams without intermediate lateral restraints (Table 14),
cantilever beams with intermediate lateral restraints (1.0L normal loads or Table 14 destabilizing loads).
Note that LLT is the segment length between restraints, and the span length is L. Note that the destabilizing loading
condition should be taken where a load is applied to the top flange of a beam or a cantilever, and both the load and
the flange are free to deflect laterally (and possibly rotationally also) relative to the centroid of the cross-section.
Lateral Torsional Buckling Moment Capacity, Mb / mLT BS 5950-Part 1:2000 cl.4.3

Critical slenderness about minor axis λyy = LEy/ry
Effective length, LEy cl. 4.3.5.1 to cl 4.3.5.5
Radius of gyration about the minor axis, ry
Effective critical axis slenderness λLT = uvλ(βW)0.5
Buckling parameter, u
cl. 4.3.6.8
For rolled equal flange I-, H- or channel section, u = 0.9 conservatively
Torsional index, x
cl. 4.3.6.8
For rolled equal flange I-, H- or channel section, x = D/T conservatively
Slenderness factor, v = f(λ/x,flange ratio η) cl. 4.3.6.7
For equal flange I-, H- or channel v = 1/(1+0.05(λ/x)2)1/4 Table 19
βW = 1.0 for Class 1 plastic and Class 2 compact sections cl. 4.3.6.9
Lateral torsional buckling moment capacity, Mb/m
Buckling resistance moment, Mb = pbSx for Class 1 and Class 2 sections
Buckling resistance moment, Mb = pbZx for Class 3 sections cl. 4.3.6.4
Buckling resistance moment, Mb = pbZeff for Class 4 sections
cl. 4.3.6.5
Bending strength, pb = f(py,λLT)
Table 16 or Table 17
cl. 4.3.6.6
Equivalent uniform moment factor, mLT
Table 18
Ensure LTB moment capacity Mb/mLT > applied design moment Md
Lateral torsional buckling cannot occur in beams loaded in their weaker principal plane; under the action of
increasing load they will collapse simply by plastic action and excessive in-plane deformation. Hence, the check
need only be made for bending about the major axis.
Lateral torsional buckling cannot occur for sections which are double symmetric such as a SHS, this being
accounted for by the fact that λLT becomes zero when Ixx = Iyy.
The equivalent uniform moment factor, mLT is used when the bending moment is not uniform across the length of
the beam. A value of 1.0 is obviously conservative. For the destabilizing loading condition mLT should be taken as
1.0.
The LTB bending resistance given by Table 16 or Table 17 is derived from
171
Second Edition
where
where the Perry factor ηLT
and where the Robertson constant aLT should be taken as 7.0 and the limiting equivalent slenderness, λL0 is
Restraints may be deemed to provide adequate stiffness and strength if capable of resisting a lateral force of at
least 2.5% of the maximum factored force in the compression flange.
172
Second Edition
173
Second Edition
174
Second Edition
3.1.6.6.4 ML, GL (P-∆ Based) Buckling of Beam-Column Elements (Primary Stress is Axial and Bending)
With Imperfections and Residual Stresses
Simplified Approach (cl. 4.8.3.3.1)
For Perry-Robertson flexural buckling about the major or minor axes with additional primary moments about
the major and minor axes, the following expression must be satisfied
Although unconservatively no amplification of major axis moment
considered, conservatively the minor axis elastic capacity is used.
Note that Pc is the Perry-Robertson flexural buckling capacity and is the smaller of Pcx and Pcy. The major axis
flexural buckling factor, mx and the minor axis flexural buckling factor, my are obtained from Table 26 (cl.
4.8.3.3.4).
For lateral torsional buckling with Perry-Robertson flexural buckling about minor axis and additional
primary moment about minor axis, the following expression must also be satisfied.
Although unconservatively no amplification of minor axis moment
considered, conservatively the minor axis elastic capacity is used.
Note that Pcy is the minor axis Perry-Robertson flexural buckling capacity. MLT is the applied major axis moment.
My is the applied minor axis moment. Mb / mLT is the lateral torsional buckling capacity.
More Exact Approach for I- or H- Sections with Equal Flanges (cl. 4.8.3.3.2)
For Perry-Robertson flexural buckling about the major with additional primary moments about the major or
minor axes, the following expression must be satisfied
where myx is obtained from Table 26 (cl. 4.8.3.3.4). The major axis flexural buckling factor, mx is also obtained
from Table 26 (cl. 4.8.3.3.4). Note that Pcx is the major axis Perry-Robertson flexural buckling capacity. Mx and My
are the major and minor axes applied moments. Mcx and Mcy are the major and minor axes plastic moment
capacities.
For lateral torsional buckling (of course about minor axis) with Perry-Robertson flexural buckling about
minor axis and additional primary moment about minor axis, the following expression must also be satisfied.
For an interactive buckling, the following expression must also be satisfied.
Similar more exact equations exist for CHS, RHS and box sections with equal flanges in cl. 4.8.3.3.3.
175
Second Edition
176
Second Edition
3.1.6.7 Overall Portal Frame and Multi-Storey Building P-∆ Analysis Using The Amplified Sway Method
Sufficient lateral stability must be provided to prevent instability. Sufficient strength must be provided to take the
increased forces (P-∆ effects) as a result of the slenderness.
To investigate the susceptibility of a structure to P-∆ effects, the elastic buckling load factor is calculated. Methods
based on BS 5950-Part 1:2000 for calculating λcr is given in Section 3.2.5.2.2.
Then assuming 4 < λcr <10, the P-∆ effects should be taken into account for the real horizontal loads (wind)
according to the amplified sway method. Had λcr been greater than 10, then the building is considered non-sway
and amplification effects, m on lateral forces need not be considered. For portal frames, if under the Notional
Horizontal Forces (NHF) of the gravity load combination, the horizontal deflections at the tops of the column are
less than height/1000, P-∆ effects need not be considered. Had λcr been less than 4, then a full nonlinear static
analysis must be undertaken to account for the P-∆ effect.
The amplified sway factor for the real horizontal loads (wind) (in perfect accordance with theory presented in
Section 3.1.2) is (cl. 2.4.2.7)
λ cr
m=
λ cr − 1
For clad structures with the stiffening effect of masonry infill wall panels or diaphragms of profiled steel sheeting
the amplified sway factor is decreased to
λ cr
m= but m > 1.0
1.15λ cr − 1.5
The ULS load combinations are presented in Section 8.2.3. Note the load case corresponding to the NHF includes
the factored dead and live load.
177
Second Edition
3.2 GL, ML Buckling Analysis by The Implicit Linearized Eigenvalue Analysis
3.2.1 Linearization of Tangent Stiffness Matrix and Formulating The Linear Eigenvalue Problem
λ

MNL, GL Plastic
U
This section describes a simple and practical method of allowing for the effects of overall buckling of the structure.
While the method can be applied to the buckling of single members, this is more easily dealt with using
conventional codified methods. Where conventional codified methods falls short, is when the boundary conditions
of the structural members (which determines the all important buckling effective length) is not intuitive.
Linear elastic buckling analysis is the prediction of the critical loads (and their associated buckling mode shapes)
when the structure is at the point of elastic instability. This instability occurs when the tangent stiffness matrix
becomes singular as a result of the increase in the negative stiffness contribution of the geometric (differential)
stiffness.
At collapse, the structure has buckled (experienced elastic instability) but has no fully plastic hinges i.e. no
considerations of material nonlinearity have been taken into account. Hence this method of analysis is only valid if
firstly, the structure remains materially linear elastic throughout until the application of the critical load causes an
elastic instability. Secondly, it is a geometrically linear method of analysis. Hence the deflections must be small
enough for the stiffnesses to be based upon the initial undeflected (by the collapsing load factor) geometry.
Let us denote the initial undeflected (by the collapsing load factor) configuration by A. In the (KGA From KEA)
elastic buckling analysis, at collapse, the elastic stiffness matrix at the initial undeflected (by the collapsing load
factor) configuration is balanced by the geometric (differential) stiffness due to the load factor.
[[K E ]+
A
]
λ[ K GAKE ] {φ} = {0}
AKE
KG represents the geometric stiffness matrix which was calculated based on the small displacements obtained by
solving the system (with the collapsing load) with stiffness KEA. Hence, a static analysis is first performed (a first
pass) based on KEA with an applied external load (which is a fraction of the critical buckling load so that the
buckling load factor will be more than 1) to generate forces in the structural elements, which in turn provides input
for the computation of KGAKE. Then, a buckling analysis is performed effectively finding the instances when
factored by λ, KGAKE balances KEA. Hence, since both the elastic stiffness matrix KEA and the geometric stiffness
matrix KGAKE are based upon the initial undeflected (by the collapsing load factor) configuration A, the method is
only valid if deflections are small enough for there to be negligible change in KEA and the geometric stiffness
matrix varies linearly with the load factor such that it can be expressed as λKGAKE until elastic instability has
been attained. The inherent assumption that the geometric stiffness matrix varies linearly with the load factor
λKGAKE enables any external load to be applied in the first pass since KGAKE will be scaled accordingly. Hence, any
initial load (less than the collapse load so that λ < 1) may be applied and the corresponding load factor λ will be
obtained such that the collapse load λPinitial or rather expressed as λPnA will be the same. The value λ are the scale
178
Second Edition
factor by which the applied load PnA is multiplied to produce the critical buckling load Pcr. The magnitude of the
applied load PnA is arbitrary for arriving at the correct Pcr. As an example, if PnA is increased by a factor of 10, then
the calculated value of λ is reduced by a factor of 10; in other words, their resulting product Pcr remains the same.
This is because the differential stiffness of the finite elements are linear functions of the axial load Fx and the
geometry l of the element (as shown below for the CBAR element) and for linear analyses, the axial load increases
linearly with the applied loads PnA.
Clearly, assuming that deflections are indeed small, the method is only valid for the first buckling mode as
subsequent deflections will certainly be too large. To illustrate the assumption, this linearized buckling analysis
basically traces the following equilibrium path.
λ
ML, GL (KGA From KEA)
Buckling Analysis λECR

A (Tracing Equilibrium Path or Implicit or Explicit
KE Time Integration with Dynamic Relaxation)
[ ] {P }
∆{U} = λ K AE
−1 A
n
That is to say, the structure follows the equilibrium path governed by the constant stiffness KEA until suddenly it
loses all its stiffness (in a direction dissimilar to that of the critical load) and buckles when λKGAKE matches KEA.
This is valid if KEA is assumed not to vary with the {U} and if the component forces {f} are approximately linear in
terms of the load factor λ such that the geometric stiffness matrix varies linearly with the load factor allowing it to
be expressed as λKGAKE until elastic instability has been attained, both of which are quite valid as long as the
tangential increment of displacement due to λ is small. This can be estimated from
[ ] {P }
∆{U} = λ K AE
−1 A
n
Hence, the forces at linear buckling are the load
factor times the linear static displacement.
where ∆{U} is the tangential increment of displacement due to λ. From the expression above, clearly the same
elastic buckling displacement (and force) response will be obtained irrespective of the initial loads applied as λ will
be obtained to scale the responses accordingly. Hence, in this approach, the response at buckling is insensitive to
the initial loads applied. Conversely, calculating the displacement response from a P-∆ static analysis, we will find
that the initial loads applied do affect the response at buckling. The P-∆ response is obtained from
{U m } = [K AE ] {{P } + {Fixed End Forces}m [ ] }

−1
+ K Gm
A
m − K Gm
A
{U 0 }
179
Second Edition
where KGA which depends on the initial loads is obtained from a first pass
{U m } = [K AE ] {{Pm } + {Fixed End Forces }m }

−1
The slightly nonlinear P-∆ path traced is shown below.

∆ Static Analysis
ML, GL P-∆

MNL, GL Plastic
U
Of course, P-∆ response calculations become inaccurate when the initial load {Pm} applied is very high such that
had a linearized buckling analysis been performed, the elastic buckling load factor λ would be less than 4.
Both the buckling load factor scaled response and the P-∆ response is not ideal. In reality of course, the gradual
application of the load would cause a gradual reduction of stiffness (as the differential stiffness gradually becomes
more negative) until buckling occurs as depicted on the smoothed curve above. This path can be traced by
performing a nonlinear static and buckling analysis (MSC.NASTRAN SOL 106) and is the recommended approach
to determining the response (displacement and element forces) at buckling.
The above (KGA From KEA) may prove inadequate in many instances such as when there is prestress in the
elements even before the application of the collapsing load factor. In this case, the (KGA From KTA) elastic
buckling analysis is performed where at collapse, the tangent stiffness matrix at the initial undeflected (by the
collapsing load factor, but includes the stiffness contribution of prestressed members) stage A configuration is
balanced by the geometric (differential) stiffness due to the load factor.
[[K T ]+
A
λ[ K Gn
AKT
]
] {φ} = {0}
AKT
KGn represents the geometric stiffness matrix which was calculated based on the small displacements obtained
by solving the system with a linear static analysis (with the collapsing load) with stiffness KTA. To obtain KTA, to be
theoretically exact, a GNL SOL 106 (or implicit dynamic relaxation SOL 129 or explicit dynamic relaxation LS-
DYNA) with prestress (as temperature loads say) and gravity must be undertaken. Alternatively, an approximation
to KTA can be obtained by repetitive P-∆ static analyses with the prestress (as temperature loads say) and gravity
applied. The procedure to obtain this approximate KTA will be presented. Note that the approximate KTA will be the
summation of the elastic stiffness KE at the undeflected (by the prestress and gravity) state but KG at the deflected
(by the prestress and gravity) state. Hence if KE changes considerably during the application of the prestress and
gravity, a full SOL 106 (or implicit dynamic relaxation SOL 129 or explicit dynamic relaxation LS-DYNA), which
converges to the KE and KG at the deflected (by the prestress and gravity) state should be employed. Hence for the
modelling of a suspension bridge where there is a great change in geometry, it may be prudent to employ SOL 106
(or implicit dynamic relaxation SOL 129 or explicit dynamic relaxation LS-DYNA), but for a high tension low sag
cable on say a tower with prestressed cables, the repetitive P-∆ static analysis may be adequate. The repetitive P-∆
analysis basically involves a number of iterations of linear static analyses to obtain an approximate KTA. Note again
that A refers to the initial undeflected (by the collapsing load) state, but deflected by the prestress and gravity. To
perform the repetitive P-∆ analysis, a static analysis is performed based on KEA with temperature loads and gravity
180
Second Edition
to generate forces in the structural elements, which in turn provides input for the computation of KGiAKTm where m
is the iterations. Repetitive static analysis is performed with the prestress and gravity updating the stiffness matrix
KEA + KGiAKTm-1 + KGiAKTm until convergence of displacements is obtained. The tangent stiffness at this stage is the
approximate converged tangent stiffness matrix KTA = KEA + KGiAKT. The converged displacements represent the
approximate P-∆ (KGA From Approximate KTA) static response to the initial prestress loads and gravity. The
converged geometric stiffness at this stage would be that based upon the approximate tangent stiffness matrix KTA,
i.e. KGiAKT. Irrespective of the method of obtaining KTA, whether by SOL 106 (or implicit dynamic relaxation SOL
129 or explicit dynamic relaxation LS-DYNA) or repetitive P-∆, another static analysis is performed on KTA, this
time with the collapsing applied external loads (which is a fraction of the critical buckling load so that the buckling
load factor will be more than 1). This generates KGnAKT. Then, a buckling analysis is performed, effectively finding
the instances when factored by λ, KGnAKT balances KTA. Hence, since both the tangent stiffness matrix KTA and the
geometric stiffness matrix KGnAKT are based upon the initial undeflected (by the collapsing load factor)
configuration A, the method is only valid if deflections are small enough for there to be negligible change in KTA
and the geometric stiffness matrix varies linearly with the load factor such that it can be expressed as
λKGnAKT until elastic instability has been attained. The inherent assumption that the geometric stiffness matrix
varies linearly with the load factor λKGnAKT enables any external load to be applied in the first pass since KGnAKT
will be scaled accordingly. However, in any FE model, even an extremely linear one, the geometric stiffness matrix
does not actually vary perfectly linear with the load factor, hence choosing a different external load value as a first
pass will result in minor discrepancies in the load factor. Clearly, assuming that deflections are indeed small, the
method is only valid for the first buckling mode as subsequent deflections will certainly be too large. To illustrate
the assumption, this linearized buckling analysis basically traces the following equilibrium path.
λ
ML, GL (KGA From KTA)
Buckling Analysis λECR

A (Tracing Equilibrium Path or Implicit or Explicit
KT Time Integration with Dynamic Relaxation)
That is to say, the structure follows the equilibrium path governed by the constant stiffness KTA until suddenly it
loses all its stiffness (in a direction dissimilar to that of the critical load) and buckles when λKGnAKT matches KTA.
This is valid if KTA is assumed not to vary with the {U} and if the component forces {f}n are approximately linear
in terms of the load factor λ such that the geometric stiffness matrix varies linearly with the load factor allowing it
to be expressed as λKGnAKT until elastic instability has been attained, both of which are quite valid as long as the
tangential increment of displacement due to λ is small. This can be estimated from
[ ] {P }
∆{U} = λ K TA
−1 A
n
where ∆{U} is the tangential increment of displacement due to λ. In reality of course, the gradual application of the
load would cause a gradual reduction of stiffness (as the differential stiffness gradually becomes more negative)
until buckling occurs as depicted on the smoothed curve above. This path can be traced by performing a nonlinear
static and buckling analysis (MSC.NASTRAN SOL 106).
Buckling analyses based on KTA is used in instances where there is prestressing and gravity before the application
of the critical buckling loads, for instance in the buckling of suspension bridge piers or cable prestressed towers.
A static solution based upon KTA (incorporating the prestress and gravity) which is obtained exactly by SOL 106
181
Second Edition
(or implicit dynamic relaxation SOL 129 or explicit dynamic relaxation) or approximately by repetitive P-∆
analysis (the latter may be valid for low sag high tension cable problems where KE does not change much due to
the prestress and gravity) must be first obtained. Then, the buckling load is applied to generate the geometric
stiffness matrix (for that buckling load) and an eigenvalue analysis is performed.
The nonlinear (in that it is dependent upon {U}) tangent stiffness matrix is restated as follows.
[K T ] = [K E ] + [K G ]
where [K E ] = [T ]T [[k E ]][T ]
Ω
 ∂2 d 
and [K G ] = [T]T [[k G ]][T] +  {f }
 ∂{U}∂ U 
 ∂2 ε   ∂ 2 Wi   ∂ 2 Wn 
for which [k G ] = ∫  {{σ}n + {σ}i − [ D ]{ε}i }dΩ −   − λ 
 ∂ {d}∂ d
Ω   ∂ {d}∂ d   ∂ {d}∂ d 
and {σ}n = [ D ][ B ]{d}
and {f } = [∫ [B] [D ][ B]dΩ ]{d} + {∫ [B] {σ} dΩ}− {∫ [B] [D ]{ε} dΩ}− {∫ [ N ] {b}dΩ}
Ω
T
Ω
T
i
Ω
T
i
Ω
Τ
As stated, we have omitted the second order variation of work due to the external nodal loadings {P} from the
 ∂2W   ∂{P}   ∂W 
−  = −  as {P} =  
 ∂{U}∂ U   ∂ U   ∂{U}
of work due to loads applied on the finite elements is obviously still taken into account.
[KT] is inherently nonlinearly dependent upon λ and {U}. The buckling problem can be expressed as a linear
eigenvalue problem if [KT] is assumed not to vary with the {U} and if the component forces {f} are
approximately linear in terms of the load factor λ. The objective is to linearize the eigenvalue problem around
the initial equilibrium state A. The first order change in [KT] for state A
[K ] = [K ] + ∆[K ] = [K ] + ∆[K ] + ∆[K ]

T
A
T T
A
T E G
∆ [K ] = ∆[T ] [ k ][T ] + [T ] [ k ]∆[T ] A T

T A A A
E E E
 ∂2 d A
  ∂2W A
  A

[ ] ∂2 d
{f } − ∆  ∂{U∂ }W   ∂ W 
2 2
∆ KG =  ∆{f } − ∆λ  n  + ∆ A
 − λ ∆
i A

n
 ∂{U}∂ U   ∂{U}∂ U   ∂{U}∂ U  ∂ U ∂{d}∂ d 
     
Although the above can be used directly for formulating a linear eigenvalue problem, the influence of a change of
geometry on [KT] is normally ignored, and hence ∆[KE] and the last 3 components of ∆[KG] are ignored. The
linearized buckling (eigenvalue) problem is thus expressed as
[K T ]{φ} = {0}
([K ] + λ[K ]){φ} = {0}
A
T
A
Gn
182
Second Edition
The nontrivial solution is obtained by solving for the eigenvalue λ in the expression
DET ([K T ]) = 0, the corresponding {φ} being the eigenvector or the buckling mode shape
([ ] [ ])
DET K TA + λ K Gn
A
=0
[ ] = [K ] + [K ]
K TA A
E
A
G
 ∂2 ε A A  ∂2 d A

=T [ ] [ ][T ] + [T ]
A T
k AE A A T
 ∂{d}∂ d
{{ }σ An + {σ}iA − [ D]{ε}iA } −
∂ 2 Wi
∂{d}∂ d 
[ ]
 TA + 
 ∂{U}∂ U
{f }
i
A
   
 ∂2 ε A
  2 A
  ∂2 d A

[K ]A
Gn =
 ∂{d}∂ d
{σ}An  − 
∂ Wn
  ∂{d}∂ d
+
  ∂{U}∂ U
{f }
A
n
     
where
{f }= {∫ [B] {σ} dΩ}− {∫ [B] [D]{ε} dΩ}

i
A T
i
T
i
{f }= [∫ [B ] [D ][B ]dΩ ]{d }− {∫ [ N] {b}

Ω Ω
A
n
Ω
A T A A A
n
Ω
T
n dΩ }
The displacements are estimated from the following equation
[ ] {P }
∆{U} = λ K TA
−1 A
n
where ∆{U} is the tangential increment of displacement due to λ.
The physical meaning of the [KTA] matrix is that it represents the tangent stiffness matrix at the initial undeflected
configuration with the effect of the prestress and the initial second order work variation included. In the linearized
buckling analysis, a load factor is found which causes the tangent stiffness to become zero by a term which
multiplies this load factor to the nominal part of the geometric (or differential) stiffness based on the initial
undeflected configuration. The nominal part refers to the additional element force {fn} and additional work Wn
terms, not the prestress {fi}. Hence, it is assumed that in the application of the load factor that both the nominal
internal forces {fnA} and the nominal second order work term vary linearly with the load factor. These factored
nominal internal force and factored nominal second order work terms are based on values at the initial state A. Also
it is assumed that the transformation matrix [T] is constant at [TA]. Thus it can be concluded that the linearized
buckling analysis is only valid when the deflections {U} are small i.e. to predict buckling along the trivial
fundamental path or along a path close to the trivial path.
A buckling point in the response of a discrete structural system is either a bifurcation point or a limit point.
Accordingly, it corresponds to an equilibrium state for which the tangent stiffness matrix [KT] becomes singular,
indicating the presence of an infinitesimally adjacent equilibrium state at the same level of loading. Linearized
buckling analysis is based on the initial undeflected geometry, i.e. (A) = initial state to determine [KTA]. [KTA] is
thus the tangential value of [KT] at the initial undeflected shape (A). There is no point in choosing another state (A)
to find [KTA], as we then might as well perform nonlinear buckling analysis.
Linear buckling analysis tends to provide good approximations to the critical load when the critical point is a
bifurcation point. But linear buckling analysis can overestimate the critical load when the critical point is a limit
point and if the buckling occurs at significant incremental deflection ∆{U} from state (A) as the change in [KT] due
to the change in {U} is ignored. This value of ∆{U} is estimated using the equation stated above in order to make a
judgment. Higher critical modes in linear buckling analysis are inaccurate if the first mode is a limit point due to
subsequent larger deflections. Hence, linear buckling analysis is most suitable for detecting bifurcation points along
trivial (or almost trivial) fundamental paths, in which case state (A) can be the initial state, and for detecting critical
points which are close to the known equilibrium state (A).
183
Second Edition
3.2.2 Problem Reduction and Trial Modes in Linear Buckling Analysis
The number of degrees of freedom n of the linear eigenvalue problem can be reduced to m as an approximation.
The linear eigenvalue problem of size n is expressed as
([K ] + ∆λ[K ]){Φ} = {0}
A
T
A
Gn
for which the exact eigenvalue ∆λ is obtained from

([ ]
det K TA + ∆λ K Gn
A
[ ])
=0
and{Φ} being the corresponding buckling modes shape or eigenvector
However, an approximate solution is obtained by approximating the exact buckling mode {Φ}
as a linear combination of m pre - defined modes in
[Φ t ] = [{Φ t1 } + {Φ t2 } + {Φ t3 } + ...{Φ tm }]
using m unknown modal parameters {φ}, m < n
{Φ} = [Φ t ]{φ}
Hence,
([K ] + ∆λ[K ])[Φ ]{φ} = {0}
A
T
A
Gn t
Pr emultiplying by [Φ t ] , the reduced linear eigenvalue problem of size m (m < n) is expressed as

T
([k ] + ∆λ[k ]){φ} = {0}

A
T
A
Gn where [k ] = [Φ ] [K ][Φ ]
A
T t
T A
T t and [k ] = [Φ ] [K ][Φ ]
A
Gn t
T A
Gn t
for which the approximate eigenvalue ∆λ is obtained from
([ ] [ ])
det k TA + ∆λ k Gn
A
= 0 and {φ} being the corresponding buckling modes shape or eigenvector
Naturally, the solution would be exact in this m size eigenvalue problem if the exact mode shape can be
modelled by [Φ t ]. This can be done if m = n, i.e. if the number of independent modes of deformation
equal the number of degrees of freedom. This would be equivalent to solving the original eigenvalue problem.
In the special case that the trial mode is to be approximated straight away such that the trial mode matrix [Φ t ]
reduces to a single column vector {Φ t }, then
{Φ} = {Φ t }{φ}
for which the approximate eigenvalue ∆λ is obtained from
∆λ = −
k TA
= −
[ ]
{Φ t }T KTA {Φ t }
A
k Gn {Φ t }T K Gn
A
[ ]
{Φ t }
and {Φ t } being the corresponding buckling modes shape or eigenvector
A good approximate mode shape for uniform shear frames based on Rayleigh's is {Φ t } = K TA [ ] {P }
−1
n
where {Pn } is the vertical loads applied horizontally.
Naturally, the solution would be exact if {Φ t } is the exact mode shape. This is ensured if
[K ]{Φ } = λ[K ]{Φ }
A
T t
A
Gn t i.e. [K ]{Φ } α [K ]{Φ }
A
T t
A
Gn t
The trial mode matrix [Φt] for the problem reduction in linear buckling analysis is a multi modal matrix. The trial
mode method assumes just one mode shape {Φt} whilst the problem reduction method assumes a linear
combination of mode shapes, [Φt] = [{Φt1}+{Φt2}+{Φt3}+…+{Φtm}]. Hence the problem reduction method is more
accurate evidently. Hence, the problem reduction method will yield a lower estimate of ∆λ than the trial mode
shape method. The nonlinear eigenvalue problem will of course yield the lowest exact value of ∆λ.
184
Second Edition
3.2.3 Concepts of Linearized (KGA From KEA) Buckling Analysis
The concept of GL, ML buckling analysis will be illustrated for a simple system.
Let us assume that deflections are small (hence geometrically linear analysis) hence the rotation of the column
segments can be described and any change in height can be neglected. Lateral equilibrium at the central pin shows
that
Rearranging so that we have the form Stiffness x Displacement = Applied Force, we get
and hence the deflection Geometric Stiffness 2N/L
We can see that the effect of the force N acting on this system can be seen as being like an additional stiffness term
2N/L, i.e. the geometric (aka differential) stiffness. The effect of the axial force is equivalent to an additional
stiffness of value 2N / L acting laterally at the pin location. If the force is tensile (i.e. positive) then the geometric
stiffness will act to increase the overall stiffness of the system. On the other hand, if it is compressive then the term
will be negative and the system stiffness will decrease. Consider the condition at which the axial compression in
our simple pin jointed system is so great that the lateral stiffness of the system is zero.
i.e.
At this critical load, buckling occurs. And the critical linear elastic buckling load factor λcr of the system is
It cannot be emphasized enough that, the buckling load factor is independent
of the initial lateral imperfections, the lateral load and material strength.
This linear buckling critical load factor is independent of the applied lateral force F and the initial lateral
imperfection. Of course, the amplified displacement response is dependent upon F and the initial imperfection.
The buckling factor is also independent of the material strength as it depends on the stiffness instead.
185
Second Edition
3.2.4.1 GL, ML (KGA From KEA) Buckling Analysis
SOL 105
DISPLACEMENT(<PRINT,PUNCH,PLOT>) = ALL/<Grid Set ID> $ Plots the buckled shapes
$
SUBCASE 1
LABEL = Static Load Case With Buckling Load
$
SUBCASE 2
LABEL = Buckling Case
STATSUB(BUCKLING) = < Static Subcase Number >
METHOD = < ID in EIGRL or EIGB >
For medium to large models, the Lanczos method is the recommended eigenvalue extraction method. Furthermore,
the Lanczos method takes full advantage of sparse matrix methods that can substantially increase computational
speed and reduce disk space usage. For overall robustness, the Lanczos method is the recommended method.
$ BULK DATA
Lower Upper Number of

EIGRL ID
Eigenvalue Eigenvalue Roots
Unlike dynamic modal analysis, linear buckling analysis produces eigenvalues that can be either positive or
negative. Note that these negative roots are legitimate both from a physical and a mathematical standpoint. In
general, this situation only occurs if the applied buckling load is in the opposite direction of the buckling load, that
is to say a buckled shape with the same magnitude of eigenvalue can be produced if the applied loading was
reversed in direction. Hence, if on the EIGRL card, only the upper eigenvalue range is specified, NASTRAN will
attempt to extract all eigenvectors below that value, including all the negative eigenvalues. Thus if we are only
interested in the fundamental mode, it is necessary to also specify the number of roots.
Buckling load factor, λ
The enhanced inverse power method (SINV) can be a good choice if the model is too large to fit into memory, only
a few modes are needed, and you have a reasonable idea of your eigenvalue range of interest. It is useful for models
186
Second Edition
in which only the lowest few modes are desired. This method is also useful as a backup method to verify the
accuracy of other methods.
$ BULK DATA
Lower Upper
EIGB ID SINV
Eigenvalue Frequency
At least two subcases are necessary, the first being the static subcase that is used in the second subcase to generate
the differential stiffness matrix from the internal element loads and then solve the eigenvalue problem. The
differential stiffness is supported by CONROD, CROD, CTUBE, CBAR (for both Euler and lateral torsional
buckling), CBEAM, CBEND, CQUAD4, CQUAD8, CTRIA3, CTRIA6, CSHEAR, CHEXA, CPENTA and
CTETRA. The contribution to the differential stiffness from the follower force effect is not included. Offsets
should not be used in beam, plate, or shell elements for buckling analysis. For 3-D buckling problems, the use of
PARAM, K6ROT is recommended for CQUAD4 and CTRIA3 elements. A value of 100 is recommended. Note
that each subcase may have a different boundary condition.
Although the element stresses, forces and strains for each buckled mode may be output, it is meaningless as they
are based upon the eigenvectors that have been scaled arbitrarily. These values DO NOT INDICATE
RESPONSE. To obtain the response (displacement and element forces) at buckling, the response from a linear
static analysis of the initial applied loads, and scaled by the critical load factor can be used.
[ ] {P }
∆{U} = λ K AE
−1 A
n
Of course though, the element strain energy density distribution (ESE request), although have likewise meaningless
magnitudes (again due to arbitrary scaling of eigenvectors), is an important design tool which shows elements
which work the most in causing that buckled mode shape. Stiffening elements with a high ESE would increase the
buckling load factor.
The number of buckled modes obtained will be limited to the number of DOFs in the finite element model. The
mesh should be fine enough to represent the buckled shape. CBAR elements have cubic polynomial transverse
interpolation functions (shape functions). But unlike in a static analysis where the cubic deflection over a beam
element can be mapped, in a buckling analysis the deflected shape is provided only by the deflections at the nodes.
Hence the beam element must be refined. Also note that the buckled mode shape of a beam member is not cubic
polynomial anyway. One dimensional elements such as CBAR elements (in a fine mesh as they may be) do not
model the local buckling of members. The local buckling of a tube or pipe (i.e. the crippling of the thin wall) in
compression must be modeled with a fine mesh of shells. A coarse mesh may predict an unconservative larger
fundamental buckling load factor as the local mode cannot be captured. It is thus important to anticipate the
buckling mode, or alternatively, continuous refinement be made. Buckling is a state of loss of stiffness, an unstable
state, i.e. failure. If the local crippling buckling mode is more critical than the overall beam buckling mode, it is
imperative that shell elements are used as line elements will give an unconservative result. Buckling generally
requires a fine mesh. If the buckled shape is jagged, it is a clear indication that the mesh is not fine enough. There
must be several elements per wavelength, usually 4 (or 8, 16, 32 etc…other numbers even 5 tend to be inferior)
elements per half sine wavelength.
Local buckling can also be checked using hand calculations based upon the physical boundary conditions and
thickness on a relevant panel to estimate the buckling stress and comparison with the stress from a linear static SOL
101 analysis to evaluate if the component would buckle under that load.
Linear buckling analysis assumed the deflections to be small and the elements stresses elastic. For structures that
exhibit nonlinear material or large deflection deformations, the linear buckling load obtained from Solution 105
may be different than the actual buckling load. For structures with significant nonlinearities, it is recommended that
a nonlinear buckling analysis using SOL 106 be performed.
187
Second Edition
The preliminary scheme stage buckling analysis of the Centre Pompidou, Metz timber roof is presented.
Centre Pompidou Timber Roof Scheme Design Linear Buckling Analysis
Linearized Buckling Due To Self-Weight (Applied Vertical Resultant 9547kN)
The applied load consists of timber planks (6097kN), intermediate packs (1039kN) and roof covering (2411kN).
The linearized buckling problem is
[[K E ]+
A
]
λ[ K GAKE ] {φ} = {0}
The instantaneous and geometric stiffnesses are based on the unfactored 5th percentile stiffness values (E = 12GPa;
G = 0.4GPa) for the timber material, hence conservative as far as buckling analysis is concerned. The geometric
stiffness is a function of the internal forces. For example, for a straight column subject to axial compression F, the
geometric stiffness is simply F/L. The critical load case which causes the greatest compression and hence the
greatest geometric stiffness is sought.
The lowest buckled mode shape (which could be replicated in reality) due to self-weight is presented. The load
factor is 16.9. Note that there was another mode with a load factor of –14.75, this indicating an upward gravity,
which is implausible, hence ignored.
Hence the first global buckling load factor to unfactored self-weight = 16.9. From plot, buckled mode shape shows
primarily vertical displacement, as the normalization is 1000 mm and the vertical displacement reach up to 982.7
mm.
The static displacement at the onset of buckling can be estimated by the following projection
[ ] {P }
∆{U} = λ K AE
−1 A
n
This can be used to ascertain whether geometrically nonlinear effects or material nonlinearity for that matter,
affects the estimation of the buckling load and the static displacement at the onset of buckling. The following is the
static displacement from the unfactored self-weight load case.
188
Second Edition
The predicted max static displacement from the unfactored self-weight case at onset of buckling is
16.9 x 143mm = 2414mm
Note that this is the max displacement, not the average. A geometrically nonlinear buckling analysis is required to
predict a more accurate buckling load.
Linearized Buckling Due To ULS Load Case A

(Max Downward Symmetrical Load 1.35Dead+1.5Snow With Applied Vertical Resultant 22530kN)
The factor of safety on buckling to the ULS load case is of interest. The first realistic mode shape is presented. The
load factor is 6.33.
As a check, from a linear projection of the self-weight case, since the distribution of load is similar, the load factor
from this ULS case should be 9547 / 22530 * 16.9 = 7.15, not too dissimilar to the above prediction.
The following is the static displacement from this ULS load case.
189
Second Edition
Hence, at the onset of buckling from the ULS case, from the above projection, the max static displacement is
6.33 x 382mm = 2418mm
This is a 2.4m deflection in a span of 40m, i.e. span/depth of 16.5. The effect of this on the accuracy of the linear
buckling load factor estimate needs to be quantified using a geometrically nonlinear buckling analysis solver.
Linearized Buckling Due To ULS Load Case B

(Asymmetrical Load 1.35Dead+1.35Wind North+1.35Snow With Applied Vertical Resultant 21280kN)
The North Wind load case refers to an asymmetric wind load case such that the windward direction experiences a
downward pressure and the leeward direction experiences an upward pressure. The first realistic mode shape is
presented. The load factor is 5.15.
Conclusion
190
Second Edition
The critical self-weight linearized buckling load factor is 16.9. Since the value is greater than 10.0, the effect of P-∆
in increasing the effects on the structure and reducing the load factor due to self-weight is negligible. The critical
ULS linearized buckling load factor is 5.15. Since the value is less than 10.0, the effect of P-∆ in increasing the
effects on the structure and reducing the load factor due to the ULS load case is not negligible. However the risk of
catastrophic buckling instability is low.
Assumptions
The following should be borne in mind when considering results.
1. Material linear and elastic until buckling.
2. Geometrically linear; Elastic stiffness KEA constant until onset of buckling and based on initial
undeformed geometry; Valid if deflections small (for negligible change in KEA) until onset on buckling and
no prestress (whether compressive which is unfavourable or tensile which is favourable) in structure.
Check magnitude of ∆{U} to be small and ensure no prestress in system.
3. Geometrically linear; Geometric stiffness KGKEA based on KEA; Valid if deflections small (for negligible
change in KEA and KGKEA) until onset on buckling. Check magnitude of ∆{U} to be small.
191
Second Edition
3.2.4.2 GL, ML (KGA From Exact or Approximate KTA) Buckling Analysis
The above subcase definitions will solve the following eigenvalue problem.
[[K E ]+
A
]
λ[ K GAKE ] {φ} = {0}
AKE
KG represents the geometric stiffness matrix which was calculated based on displacements obtained by solving
the system with stiffness KEA. This may prove inadequate in many instances such as when there is prestress in the
elements. The linearized buckling problem as described in the theory section is sought as
[[K T ]+
A
λ[ K Gn
AKT
]
] {φ} = {0}
AKT
KG represents the geometric stiffness matrix which was calculated based on displacements obtained by solving
the system with stiffness KTA.
Phase 1
Phase 2
Phase 3
192
Second Edition
Phase 4
Linearized buckling analysis is now performed with the stiffness of the structure at KTA and with a general buckling
load. A SOL 105 is undertaken with the Case Control Section described as follows. It includes one more static
analysis with the collapsing buckling load (a fraction of the critical load so that the load factor is more than 1) in
order to generate the KGnAKT matrix. Then a buckling analysis is performed.
SUBCASE 1
LABEL = P-∆ (KGA From Approximate KTA) Static Load Case With Buckling Load
k2gg = ktjj
SUBCASE 2
k2gg = ktjj
METHOD = < ID in EIGRL >
$ BULK DATA
Include ‘….pch file containing ktjj’
The responses at this stage represent the (KGA From Approximate KTA) linear buckling response.
We have thus introduced so far 4 methods of getting the KTA matrix, namely full SOL 106, an implicit dynamic
relaxation SOL 129, an explicit dynamic relaxation LS-DYNA or a repetitive P-∆ static analysis, all with the
prestress and other loads. Once the KTA matrix is obtained, all that is required is to perform a linear static analysis
with the buckling loads in order to generate a KGA (clearly from KTA) matrix. Now the linearized buckling problem
can be solved as the linear eigenvalue problem [KTA + λKGA]{φ}={0}. Another approximate procedure can also be
employed in order to generate the KTA matrix.

SUBCASE 1
LABEL = Static Preload Load Case
SUBCASE 2
LABEL = Static Load Case With Buckling Load
SUBCASE 3
STATSUB(PRELOAD) = 1
STATSUB(BUCKLING) = 2
193
Second Edition
The STATSUB(PRELOAD) computes the differential stiffness due to the prestress and also the follower force. The
these observations are reversed in case of centrifugal loads. Centrifugal forces as a constant (static) load are applied by a
RPM is over 1000.
Another important observation is that the preload cannot buckle the structure. The basic eigenvalue problem was
expressed as
where λ is an eigenvalue which is a multiplier to the applied load to attain a critical buckling load. If there exists
constant preloads other than the buckling load in question, the above equation should include additional differential
stiffness, i.e.
in which differential stiffness is distinguished for constant preload and variable buckling load. Notice that no
eigenvalue solutions are meaningful if the preload makes the structure buckle, i.e.
should be positive definite.
194
Second Edition
3.2.5.1 Member or Local (KGA From KEA) Buckling
3.2.5.1.1 ML, GL Euler Buckling of Column Elements (Primary Stress is Only Axial)
The Euler equation for the critical elastic buckling load for an elastic, isotropic and straight column is
π 2 EI The Euler load estimate is perfectly analogous
PE = 2
LE to the SOL 105 buckling load estimate.
where LE is the effective length (distance between the points of contraflexure) depending on the boundary
conditions.
Boundary Conditions Effective Length, LE
Non-Sway Sway
Pinned-Pinned 1.0L (Truss)
Pinned-Rigid 0.699L 2.0L
Rigid-Rigid 0.5L 1.0L
The Euler equation is of course only valid for columns that are sufficiently long enough to experience linear elastic
instability before yielding. Hence it is better to work in terms of axial stresses as the yield stress is clearly defined.
The critical Euler stress is
π2E I
σE = where r =
(L E / r ) 2
A
It cannot be emphasized enough that, the
and is only valid if theoretical buckling load factor is independent
of the initial lateral imperfections, the lateral
LE π2E load and material strength.
>
r σy
This is all illustrated in the following diagram.
σ cr The curves are fully described by the Rankine
σ cr = σ y σy
σy buckling formula σ RANKINE =
π2E σy  L 2
σ cr = 1+ 2  e 
(L E / r )2 π E r 
LE
Slendernes s
r
LE π2E
=
r σy
The buckling stress capacity depends on the stiffness of the element and the boundary conditions, both of which is
accounted for in the slenderness parameter LE/r. For low slenderness, the beam fails by yielding, and for high
slenderness, it fails by buckling. This slenderness parameter should be checked for both the major axis and the
minor axis as the boundary conditions may differ. The capacity corresponding to the greater slenderness is clearly
critical. The critical load capacity is
PE = σ E A
The Euler buckling load presented hitherto is actually the flexural Euler buckling load
π 2 EA
PE = σ E A =
(L E / r )2
195
Second Edition
There is also the much smaller possibility of shear buckling. When buckling occurs, shear forces act on the section.
These give rise to additional shear deformations that reduce the force that the member can take in compression
before it becomes unstable and buckles.
The critical load for combined flexural and shear buckling is given by
1/Ncrit = 1/Ncrit.flexural +1/Ncrit.shear
Hence, the critical force is reduced approximately by the factor 1/[1+Ncrit/GAs), where Ncrit is the critical force in
the absence of shear deformation.
On top of Euler flexural and shear buckling, columns are also subject to torsional buckling and flexural-
torsional buckling. These occur when the ratio of torsional to flexural stiffness is very much reduced.
196
Second Edition
3.2.5.1.2 ML, GL Lateral-Torsional Buckling of Beam Elements (Primary Stress is Only Bending)
From classical mechanics, it can be shown that the lateral torsional buckling capacity for an elastic, isotropic beam
with a uniform bending moment diagram is
π π 2 EI w The LTB load estimate is perfectly analogous

M LTB = EI MINOR GJ 1 + to the SOL 105 buckling load estimate.
LE L2E GJ
h2
I w = warping stiffness = I MINOR for an I - section
4
The lateral-torsional buckling of a beam is governed by both the minor axis elastic second moment of area, IMINOR
and also the torsional constant, J. Contrast with the Euler buckling which depended upon only the minor axis elastic
second moment of area, IMINOR.
The π is replaced with another value depending on the bending moment diagram; 4.24 for a triangular BMD due to
a central point load; 3.53 for a uniform uniformly distributed load BMD.
However, beams are subject to plastic failure (attainment of plastic moment capacity) at low slenderness and to
lateral torsional buckling at higher slenderness. The plastic moment capacity is
M plastic = S plastic σ y
This is all illustrated in the following diagram. It cannot be emphasized enough that, the
theoretical buckling load factor is independent
σ cr of the initial lateral imperfections, the lateral
M plastic
σ cr = = σy load and material strength.
S plastic
σy
M LTB
σ cr =
S plastic
LE
Slendernes s
r
The buckling stress capacity depends on the stiffness of the element and the boundary conditions, both of which is
accounted for in the slenderness parameter (LE/r). For low slenderness, the beam fails by yielding, and for high
slenderness, it fails by lateral torsional buckling.
Lateral torsional buckling cannot occur in beams loaded in their weaker principal plane; under the action of
increasing load they will collapse simply by plastic action and excessive in-plane deformation. Hence, the check
need only be made for bending about the major axis.
197
Second Edition
3.2.5.1.3 ML, GL Euler Buckling of Plate Elements
Theoretical solution for the Euler buckling of a plate (panel) of thickness t, width of b and the two loaded edges
simply supported is a
kπ 2 E b
σE =
( )
12 1 − ν 2 (b / t )
2
where k is dependent upon the boundary conditions of the two non-loaded edges and also on the ratio of a/b, where
a is the length of the panel. The table below presents the minimum values of k for different boundary conditions of
the unloaded edge, with the loaded edge simply supported.
Unloaded Edge Condition k

Both fixed 6.970
One fixed, one simply supported 5.420
Both simply supported 4.000
One fixed, one free 1.280
One simply supported, one free 0.425
Unlike columns, plates do not collapse when the critical buckling load is achieved. Constraints due to the two-
dimensional nature of the plates allow plates to resist increasing loads beyond buckling. Hence the nonlinear post-
buckling analysis is more important for plates.
In BS 5950-Part 1:2000, cross-sections are classified to determine whether local buckling influences their
capacity, without calculating their local buckling resistance. The classification of each element of a cross-section
subject to compression (due to a bending moment or an axial force) should be based on its width-to-thickness ratio.
The section classes are as follows.
Class 1 Plastic: Sections with plastic hinge rotation capacity. The full plastic modulus S may be used in design.
Class 2 Compact: Sections with plastic moment capacity. The full plastic modulus S may be used in design.
Class 3 Semi-Compact: Sections in which the stress at the extreme compression fibre can reach the design
strength, but the plastic moment capacity cannot be developed. Elastic design methods must be adopted, i.e. the full
elastic modulus Z must be used in design.
Class 4 Slender: Sections in which it is necessary to make explicit allowance for the effects of local buckling. BS
5950-Part 1:2000 gives approximate methods using an effective area for Z calculation in cl. 3.6.
198
Second Edition
Section Classification BS 5950-Part 1:2000 cl. 3.5

Design strength of steel, py = f(steel Grade, thickness) (N/mm2) Table 9
For Class 1, 2, 3, the outstand element of rolled compression flange b/T (half of the
width of flange divided by the flange thickness) must be < 9ε, 10ε, 15ε
For Class 1, 2, 3, the internal element of compression flange b/T (width of attached
plate on flange divided by thickness of attached plate) must be < 28ε, 32ε, 40ε
For Class 1, 2, 3, the outstand element of welded compression flange b/T (width of
the outstand portion of attached plate on flange divided by the thickness of the Table 11 or Table 12
attached plate) must be < 8ε, 9ε, 13ε
For Class 1, 2, 3, an angle or the outstand of an angle connected onto another
component b/t and d/t must be < 9ε, 10ε, 15ε
For Class 1, 2, 3, the stem of a T- section D/t must be < 8ε, 9ε, 18ε Table 11 or Table 12
For Class 1, 2, 3, the web of I-, H- or Box section d/t must be < 80ε, 100ε, 120ε Table 11 or Table 12
For Class 1, 2, 3, the web of a channel section d/t must be < 40ε, 40ε, 40ε Table 11 or Table 12
For Class 1, 2, 3, CHS must have D/t < 40ε , 50ε , 140ε
2 2 2
For Class 1, 2, 3, RHS must have b/t < 28ε, 32ε, 40ε and d/t < 64ε, 80ε, 120ε Table 11 or Table 12
Note that ε = (275/py) .
0.5
Note the much tighter criteria (about 9ε, 10ε, 15ε) for local sections which are not constrained such as the outstand
of a flange, an angle or the stem of T- section. Note the fairly relaxed criteria (about 40ε, 40ε, 40ε) for partially
constrained sections such as the web of a channel. And note the very relaxed criteria (about 80ε, 100ε, 120ε) for
constrained sections such as the web of a I-, H- or Box section.
199
Second Edition
200
Second Edition
201
Second Edition
3.2.5.1.4 Web Shear Buckling
Web Shear Buckling BS 5950-Part 1:2000 cl. 4.4.5

Ensure d/t < 62ε for welded sections or 70ε for rolled sections to avoid web shear buckling
Additional considerations to moment capacity must be made according to cl. 4.4.4.2 if web is subject to shear
buckling.
202
Second Edition
3.2.5.2 Overall System (KGA From KEA) Buckling
3.2.5.2.1 Linear Elastic Buckling Based on Energy Principles
203
Second Edition
204
Second Edition
205
Second Edition
206
Second Edition
207
Second Edition
208
Second Edition
209
Second Edition
210
Second Edition
211
Second Edition
212
Second Edition
3.2.5.2.2 ML, GL Approximate Bifurcation (Linear Buckling) Analysis of Multi-Story Frames
The approximate bifurcation analysis of multi-story frames estimates an approximate elastic critical load, λECR.
BS 5950-Part 1:2000 (cl. 2.4.2.6) gives a method for calculating λcr for simple (symmetric in plan) multi-storey
buildings (excluding single-storey frames with moment-resisting joints and other multi-storey frames in which
sloping members have moment-resisting connections) based on the deflection due to the Notional Horizontal
Forces of 0.5% of the factored vertical (1.4 dead + 1.6 live) load or 1.0% of the factored vertical (1.4 dead)
load, whichever the greater applied at the same level.
1 h
λ cr =
200 δ
where h/δ is the value of the storey height divided by the deflection over that storey (deflection at top of storey
relative to deflection at bottom of storey) for any storey in the building. The smallest value considering every
storey should be used. This equation is based on a shear mode buckling and gives very good agreement with more
detailed analysis. Lower buildings tend to be governed by shear buckling whilst taller buildings are governed by the
flexural buckling mode. If the mode is flexural, the above simple equation is likely to underestimate (conservative)
λcr. The stability systems for steel buildings are often braced cores. It can be shown that if the stress in the
diagonals is greater than 57MPa, however stiff the columns and beams, λcr will be less than 10.
213
Second Edition
3.3 GL, MNL Plastic Collapse Analysis by the Implicit Linear Simplex Programming
Great structural engineering failures since time immemorial can be attributed to a lack of redundancy. A plastic
collapse analysis is a brilliant method of finding out the amount of redundancy that a structure had to a load.


MNL, GL Plastic
U
Plastic collapse analysis is performed if material non-linearity (yielding and subsequent formation of plastic hinges)
is thought to be more significant than elastic buckling instability in causing the failure of the structure. The
structure has not buckled (experienced elastic instability) but has α + 1 fully plastic hinges, i.e. a mechanism.
In order to use plastic collapse analysis methods, the beams and columns must be ductile, i.e. must be able to
deform sufficiently to form plastic hinges. Ductility in beams improved by having less than 4% steel reinforcement,
having shear links to confine concrete in three dimensions, having a little compression steel, too much of which
will reduce ductility. Ductility in columns improved by having shear links to confine concrete in three dimensions
to avoid the propagation of micro-cracks.
The Uniqueness Theorem states that the smallest critical plastic collapse load factor is attained if the 3 following
condition are achieved: -
I. Equilibrium condition: The bending moment distribution must be in equilibrium with the external
applied loads
II. Yield condition: The bending moment must nowhere exceed the plastic moment capacity of the section
III. Mechanism condition: There must be sufficient plastic hinges to form a mechanism.
The Upper Bound Mechanism Method of Plastic Limit Analysis to find λP uses the equilibrium conditions and
postulates many collapse mechanisms, finding the critical combination by minimizing λP. If the postulated collapse
mechanisms subsumes the critical one, then the collapse bending moment diagram will show that no part of the
structure does the moment exceed the plastic moment capacity, i.e. the yield condition would have been met.
min λ
λOPT
The proposed plastic collapse analysis is a geometrically linear method. Often, P-∆ effects (reduction in lateral
bending stiffness of axially loaded columns) need to be accounted for. We could approximately incorporate
geometric non-linearity to find an approximate λF by employing Wood’s adaptation of the Merchant-Rankine
empirical formula based on an estimate of the critical elastic load factor, λE. Note also that should the axial forces
be large in certain elements, the value of the plastic moment capacity MP would decrease in accordance with the M-
N diagram.
214
Second Edition
The analysis is performed as follows
(i) Select critical sections C or C* (i.e. whether simple frame or multi-bay multi-storey frame), identify degree
of static indeterminacy α or α* (i.e. whether simple frame or multi-bay multi-storey frame), and establish the
sign convention for positive bending moments and rotations.
Select critical sections C i.e. potential plastic hinge locations
- fixed supports
- joints between members
- between two members without applied moment, only one possible critical section at the joint,
i.e. at the weaker member
- between two members with applied moment, two possible critical sections
- at a 3 or more member joint, all the member ends must be included as possible critical sections
- under concentrated loads
- under uniform loads
- at changes of member detailing, i.e. discontinuity in MP and plastic hinge occurs in weaker section
Degree of static indeterminacy for plane frames = 3 (number of windows) – releases r

Degree of static indeterminacy for space frames = 6 (number of windows) – releases r
Degree of static indeterminacy for grillages = 3 (number of windows – 1) – releases r
Hyperstatic Isostatic
Statically indeterminate, α > 0 Statically determinate, α = 0
Many stress paths from any point to root Only one stress paths from any point to root
One or more mesh or closed loop No mesh or closed loop
Bending moments and rotations are defined as positive if they cause tension or extension at the side with the
dotted lines. For multi-storey multi-bay buildings, the dotted line is drawn under beams and on the right of
columns by convention.
(ii) Formulate the equilibrium law equations
Draw bending diagrams (employing sign convention) on released structure for: -

(a) Releases p1, p2, p3 …
(b) External load parameter λ
p 
m C = [B b 0 ]  α 
λ 
p 
 m1   B . . b0   1   B
. . . .   p1  b0 
 .  . .
 = . . .     .
. . .  
.  .   .
 . = + λ 
 .  . . . . .   . . . .  .  .
    p     
 mC   . . . B b0   α   . . . B.  pα  b0 
 λ 
215
Second Edition
(iii) Formulate the mesh kinematic linear program for the plastic limit analysis
 b T − b T0  & 1
minimise λ = M P θ&* 2C subject to  T0 θ = 
T
T *
B − B  0
positivity condition θ&* ≥ 0
(iv) Solve the linear program using the Simplex method
(v) Determine the uniqueness of the collapse mechanism
(vi) Determine the uniqueness of the bending moment diagram at collapse
(vii) Establish the bending moment distribution at collapse from the equilibrium equations
(viii) Establish the actual elastic and plastic deformations (i.e. rotations and displacements)
[Ba]T{θPa} = −[B]T[f]{m}
[Ba] = mesh matrix associated with active plastic hinges
{θPa} = active plastic hinges vector
[B] = complete mesh matrix
[f] = flexibility matrix
{m} = bending moment at collapse vector
{d} = [B0]T {{θE}+{θPa}}
= [B0]T {[f]{m}+{θPa}}
{d} = displacement vector
[B0] = matrix equilibrating a unit load without compatibility considerations at each and
every station where the deflection is sought
(ix) Employ the approximate bifurcation analysis for simple frames or other methods to find an approximate λECR
Steven ' s Estimate λ ECR = 0.9

∑S h φ
i i i
∑V h φ
i
2
i i
S/ V
Horne' s Estimate λ ECR = 0.9
Max φi
(x) Employ Wood’s adaptation of the Merchant-Rankine empirical formula to find an approximate λF. This
effectively accounts for the P-∆ (KGA From KEA) effect from the linear elastic buckling load, which is based
on the initial undeflected geometry.
λF 1 λ ECR
= for 4≤ ≤ 10
λP λ λP
0.9 + P
λ ECR
λF λ ECR
= 1 for ≥ 10 i.e. assume no geometricnonlinearity effect beyond ratio of 10
λP λP
Note that in conceptually well designed structures, λECR >> λP such that λF ~ λP (Merchant-Rankine). Also,
λE << λP so that the structure deforms considerably in plasticity before failure.
216
Second Edition
3.3.2 Mathematical Proof
Equilibrium law equations
 p
m = [B B 0 ]  
λ 
 p1 
 . 
 m1   B . . . B0 . .  
 .  .  . 
 = . . . . . .   
p
 .  . . . . . . .  α 
    λ 
 mC   . . . B . . B0   1 
 . 
λ 
 total 
Incorporating the single parameter loading λ, the equilibrium law equations become
 p
m = [B b 0 ]   = B p + λ b 0
λ 
p 
 m1   B . . b0   1   B
. . . .   p1  b0 
 .  . .
 = . . .     .
. . .  
.  .   .
 . = + λ 
 .  . . . . .   . . . .  .  .
    p     
 mC   . . . B b0   α   . . . B.  pα  b0 
 λ 
Kinematic law equations by the static-kinematic duality law
 v&  B T  &
δ& =  T ϑ
  B 0 
 v&1   B T . . . 
 .   
   . . . .  &
θ 
 .   . . . .  1 
    .
 v&α  =  . . . BT  
 . 
 δ&1   B0T . . .  &
    θ 
 .   . . . .  C 
δ&   . . . B0T 
 total  
217
Second Edition
Incorporating the single parameter loading λ, the kinematic law equations become
 v&   B T  &
W&  =  T ϑ
 λ =1   b 0 
 v&1   B T . . .  &
 .    θ 
   . . . .  1 
.
 . = . . . .  
    . 
 v&α   . . . BT  & 
θ 
W&λ =1   b0T . . b0T   C 
Mechanism compatibility law
[0] = [B T ]ϑ&
0  B T . .  θ&.1

.   
 = . . . .
 . 
.  . . .  . 
.
    
0  . . . B T  θ&C 
Rate of Work
W&= λ δ&
T
T
[ ]
W&= λ B 0 θ&from the kinematic law
T
W&= [λ B ]θ&
T T
0
W&= [B 0 λ ] θ&
T
W&= [b λ ] θ&
T
0
W&= λ b 0 ϑ&
T
at unit load factor, W&λ =1 = b 0 ϑ&

T
Rate of Energy Dissipation
&= M T θ& ,
D θ&* ≥ 0
P *
θ&*+1 
 
 . 
 . 
 &+C 
[
&= M +1 . . M +C
D M P−1 . . . M P−C ]θ *  , θ&* ≥ 0
P P  θ&−1 
 * 
 . 
 . 
 
θ&*−C 
218
Second Edition
The rate of energy dissipation terms are always positive. Also, only one of the angle terms (of the +ve and –ve
superscripted angle terms) for each particular critical section should be included in the rate of energy computation.
Flow Rule
θ&= Nθ&* , θ&* ≥ 0
θ&*+1 
 
 . 
θ& 1
 1 −1  . 
  
−1   &+C 
 . = 1  θ * , θ&* ≥ 0
 .   1 −1   θ&*−1 
 &   
θ C   1 − 1  . 
 . 
 
θ&*−C 
Mesh Kinematic Linear Program for Plastic Limit Analysis
For collapse,
W&= D&
λ b T0 ϑ&= M P T θ&* , θ&* ≥ 0
but θ&= Nθ&* , θ&* ≥ 0
λ b T0 Nθ&* = M P T θ&* , θ&* ≥ 0
b Nθ& = 1 (normalisation condition)
T
0 *
∴ λ = M P θ&* , θ&* ≥ 0
T
Hence, the mesh kinematic linear program for plastic limit analysis is
minimise λ = M T θ& P *
b T
− b  & 1  (1 equation for normalisation condition, 2C terms)
T
θ * =  
0 0
subject to 
−B  0 (α equations for mechanism compability, 2C terms)
T T
B
positivity condition θ& ≥ 0
*
219
Second Edition
Rewriting, the mesh kinematic linear program for plastic limit analysis is
 θ&*+1 
 
 . 
 . 
 +C 
minimise [
λ = M +P1 . . M +PC M −P1 . . . M −PC θ&* 
]
 θ&−1 
 * 
 . 
 
 . 
θ&*−C 
 θ&*+1 
 
T C 
.  (1 equation for the
 bT . . b T0
C
− b T0 . . − b0 1
 0T  .    normalisation condition
− BT − B C   &+ C  0
T T
B . . BC . .
 . θ *  with 2C terms, and
subject to
 . . . . . . .   &−1  = 0
θ*   α equations for
 . . . . . . . .   0
T  . 
 T mechanism compability
T
− Bα
T
− B α ,C    
B α . . B α,C . .  0 with 2C terms)
 . 
θ&*−C 
+ −
positivity condition θ&* ≥ 0, θ&* ≥ 0
220
Second Edition
3.3.3 Displacements and Rotations at Collapse
221
Second Edition
3.3.4 Plastic Limit Analysis of Simple Framed Structures
3.3.4.1 Portal Frame
Given simple frame with beam 2MP and columns MP subject to vertical 4λ and horizontal 1λ loading as shown.
The plastic collapse load factor is required.
Select critical sections C (shown by the blackened circles), identify the degree of static indeterminacy α, and
establish the sign convention for positive bending moments and rotations. For bending moments, tension is positive
and for rotations, extension is positive.
4λ
2 3 4
λ
α=2
L
C=4
1
2L
Draw bending diagrams (employing sign convention) on released structure for releases p1, p2 and external loads
defined by single parameter loading λ. We only need a load-equilibrating BMD (that not necessarily satisfies
compatibility) for the external load whilst the BMD for the releases should satisfy compatibility. The flexural
analysis for the releases p1 and p2 does not include the external loads, whilst that of λ naturally does. One solution
would be to release two rotational freedoms at 1 and 3 such that a three-pinned-arch is formed. The releases of an
internal action would necessitate the use of a bi-external action to define the p-action diagram. For instance, the
releases of an internal bending moment would require the use of a bi-external moment to define the p-BMD.
Formulate the equilibrium law equations. Leave the b0 matrix vector numerical, hence placing the variables λ, L etc
in the RHS release-loading vector.
4λ
0 -0.5 P 2
-1.5 0 -2.5
1 1 λ
0.5
1
1 0 0
P1
P1=1 diagram P2=1 diagram λ=1/L diagram
 m1   1
1 0 0 
 3
p  m  1 −   p1 
m C = [B b 0 ]  α  
 2 = 2 2 p 
λ   m3   0 1 0   2 
  − 1 1 − 5  λL 
m4   2 
2
Formulate the mesh kinematic linear program for the plastic limit analysis of the frame. Leave MPT numerical. All
MPT values are positive and are repeated in the latter half of the row vector.
 b T − b T0  & 1
minimise λ = M P θ&* 2C subject to  0T θ = 
T
T *
 B − B  0
positivity condition θ& ≥ 0
*
222
Second Edition
 θ&*+1   θ&*+1 
 &+ 2   &+ 2 
 θ*   3 5 3
θ
5   +*3 
θ&+3 . 0 − 2 0 − 2 0 0  θ& .
 &*+ 4  2 2   *+ 4  1
θ  1   θ&*   
minimise z = [1 1 2 1 1 1 2 1] *−1  subject to
1 1 1
1 0 − −1 − 0  = 0
θ&  2 2 2 2   θ&*−1   
 −* 2  0 1 1 1 0 −1 − 1 − 1  &−2  0
 θ&*     θ* 
 &−3  &−3
θ* . θ* .
 θ&*− 4   θ&*−4 
M
positivity condition θ&* ≥ 0 and note that λ MIN = z MIN P since M TP and b 0 were left numerical.
L
Alternatively, numerical values could have been used for MP and L, in which case λMIN = zMIN. Set up and solve the
linear programme (LP) in a Simplex Solver.
PLASTIC MOMENT OF RESISTANCE, MP
1 1 2 1 1 1 2 1
KINEMATIC MATRIX
0 -1.5 0 -2.5 0 1.5 0 2.5
1 0.5 0 -0.5 -1 -0.5 0 0.5
0 1 1 1 0 -1 -1 -1
Cells to change Target cell
VARIABLES, θ to minimize
0 0 0.4 0 0.2 0 0 0.4
OBJECTIVE FUNCTION TERMS (= MP x θ) SUM

0 0 0.8 0 0.2 0 0 0.4 1.4
CONSTRAINT FUNCTION TERMS (= KINEMATIC MATRIX x θ) SUM

0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1
0 0 0 0 -0.2 0 0 0.2 0
0 0 0.4 0 0 0 0 -0.4 0
Also include positivity condition Constraints
The changed cells in red represent the solution. The Sensitivity Report will also be produced by the solver.
Microsoft Excel 9.0 Sensitivity Report

Worksheet: [simplex - plastic collapse analysis.xls]Sheet1
Report Created: 26/05/2003 17:02:57
Adjustable Cells
Final Reduced Objective Allowable Allowable
Cell Name Value Cost Coefficient Increase Decrease
$A$10 VARIABLES, θ 0 2 1 1E+30 2
$B$10 0 1.6 1 1E+30 1.6
$C$10 0.4 0 2 4 1
$D$10 0 2 1 1E+30 2
223
Second Edition
$E$10 0.2 0 1 0.5 2

$F$10 0 0.4 1 1E+30 0.4
$G$10 0 4 2 1E+30 4
$H$10 0.4 0 10.666666667 2
Constraints
Final Shadow Constraint Allowable Allowable
Cell Name Value Price R.H. Side Increase Decrease
$J$16 SUM 1 1.4 1 1E+30 1
$J$18 SUM 0 2 0 1E+30 0.4
$J$17 SUM 0 -1 0 0.2 1E+30
Constraints
Cell Name Cell Value Formula Status Slack
$J$16 SUM 1$J$16=1 Binding 0
$J$18 SUM 0$J$18=0 Not Binding 0
$J$17 SUM 0$J$17=0 Binding 0
We shall interpret the results and the Sensitivity Report.
(a) The collapse load factor λMIN and plastic hinge angular velocities θ at collapse
λMIN = zMIN MP / L = 1.4 MP / L (take MP = 1 and λ = 1 if they have been included numerically)
θ∗+1 θ∗+2 θ∗+3 θ∗+4 θ∗−1 θ∗−2 θ∗−3 θ∗−4
0 0 0.4 0 0.2 0 0 0.4
(b) Current basic variables, potential basic variables (but as of the final tableau still non-basic) and non-basic
variables recognition
Current basic variables (participating or non-participating plastic hinges) could be zero (non-participating) as
well as have a non-zero (participating) value. Hence, current basic variables (i.e. variables in the basis in the
final tableau) are recognized by the fact that they: -
(i) have finite (zero inclusive) allowable increase in cost coefficient MPj
Note that current basic variables can have zero or non-zero final values. Current basic variables will definitely
have zero reduced cost values.
Non-basic variables include all variables that are not basic variables. Non-basic variables are recognized by the
fact that they: -
(i) have infinite allowable increase in cost coefficient MPj,
Note that non-basic variables will definitely have zero final values. Non-basic variables can have reduced cost
values of zero or non-zero.
Potential basic variables (but as of the final tableau still non-basic) are recognized by the fact that they: -
(i) are non-basic variables, hence contain all recognition conditions of non-basic variables as above, AND
(ii) have zero reduced cost
Basic variables Non-basic variables Potential basic variables
224
Second Edition
(c) Reduced costs

The reduced costs are the objective function coefficients in the optimal tableau. For each variable xj (or θj), the
reduced cost gives the increase in the target cell (z) for a unit change in the variable xj (or θj). Hence, if we take
a non-basic (which is not a potential basic variable) angular velocity θ∗ and increase it by a unit, this would
cause λ to increase by the reduced cost and hence λ would no longer be optimal.
∂z
Reduced cost C j =
∂θ&*j
The reduced cost values associated with the basic variables (plastic hinge velocities) must be zero. However, if
any reduced cost is zero for a non-basic variable, there can be an alternate collapse mechanism having the same
load factor because this non-basic variable could be brought into the basis to form another collapse mechanism
without increasing the plastic collapse load factor.
(d) Allowable increase and allowable decrease

The allowable increase is the amount by which the objective function coefficient cj (MPj) in the original tableau
may increase before the value of xj (or θj) in the optimal solution is changed. For a non-basic variable, cj (MPj)
can vary between min cj and +∝ before the xj (or θj) value is changed. Basic variables on the other hand have
finite (zero inclusive) allowable increase values for its corresponding coefficients.
(e) Shadow prices (a.k.a. Lagrange multipliers or dual variables)

There is a shadow price associated with each constraint. The shadow price measures the change in the objective
function z due to a unit change in the RHS of the constraints bi. But then, in this context of plastic limit
analysis, the RHS of the constraints are either 0 or 1.
∂z
Shadow price ∏ i =
∂b i
The shadow price corresponding to the normalization constraint is the collapse load factor as obtained earlier.
More importantly, the shadow prices associated with the mechanism compatibility constraints are the
indeterminate forces from which the bending moment distribution at collapse can be ascertained. There is an
indeterminate p force value for every mechanism compatibility constraint. It is crucial that the p value is
associated with its corresponding constraint. Hence the manner in which the constraints are inserted into the
Excel Solver tool determines the manner in which the p values are outputted. Note the cell name column in the
constraints table for clarification. Here λ = 1.4MP / L, p1 = −1MP and p2 = 2MP.
(f) Uniqueness of collapse mechanism

The existence of a potential basic variable (but as of the final tableau still non-basic) confirms the non-
uniqueness of the collapse mechanism. Other potential collapse mechanisms involve the activation of these
potential basic variables (but non-basic as of the final tableau). The true collapse mechanism will involve some
form of addition of all these potential plastic collapse mechanisms, i.e. MTRUE = α1M1 + α2M2 + α3M3 +… The
existence of non-uniqueness in the collapse mechanism usually occurs when there are two concentrated loads
of equal magnitudes acting on a beam and so causing two potential partial collapse mechanisms with the true
collapse mechanism being the addition of the two, i.e. a complete collapse mechanism.
(g) Uniqueness of bending moment diagram (BMD) at collapse

The uniqueness of the BMD can be tested on a potential collapse mechanism or even the true collapse
mechanism. The uniqueness of the collapse mechanism and the uniqueness of the BMD are independent
properties. A collapse mechanism has a unique BMD if and only if it is a complete collapse mechanism, i.e. it
has α+1 active participating (non-zero) angular velocities of plastic hinges. Note that some basic variables are
zero and they cannot be included as one of the α+1 active participating hinges. The uniqueness of the BMD
comes from the fact that having α+1 known MP locations will allow α+1 equations in the equilibrium law
define uniquely the values of λ, p1, p2 … pα. However, if there are not α+1 active plastic hinges (and hence no
unique BMD as the structure is statically indeterminate at collapse), then any BMD that satisfies equilibrium
225
Second Edition
will be on the safe side and can be accepted for design. Hence we could just use the shadow price values (of λ,
p1, p2 … pα) off Excel in the equilibrium equations for a BMD.
(h) Bending moment distribution at collapse

p 
m C = [B b 0 ]  α 
λ
 m1   11 0 0   1 0 0    − 1.0M P 
m  
3   p1   1 3
1 −  1 −   − 1M P  − 0.6M 
 2 =  2 2 p  =  2 2  2M  =  P
m 3   0 1 0  2  0 1 0  P
  2.0M P 
   1 5  λ L   1 5  MP   
m 4  − 2 1 −    − 1 −  1.4 L L  − 1.0M P 
2  2 2
Check that the bending moment everywhere is less than the particular plastic moment of resistance of the member.
If so, we have correctly chosen the critical sections C that will produce the smallest value of λ. And hence the Yield
Condition is met and λ is the unique collapse load factor according to the Uniqueness Theorem.
To reiterate the above results for ease of understanding, we make the following observations in this order: -
I. The critical plastic load factor is λP = 1.4 MP / L shown in the target cell to minimize and again in the
Shadow Price of the Sensitivity Report.
II. Identify the basic variables, i.e. the locations that a plastic hinge forms to form the collapse mechanism.
This is identified in the Sensitivity Report on variables with a Finite (zero included) Allowable
Increase. Here, they are θ3, θ1 and θ4, the latter two of which are negative. This means that they rotate
such as to cause compression on the positive sign convention side. Usually (but not necessarily) the basic
variables will be non-zero.
4λ
2 3 4
λ
The value of the Allowable Increase is the amount by which the objective function coefficient i.e. the MP
value corresponding to the basic variable can increase before the solution (i.e. values of the angular
velocity θj) changes. This is useful to force another (maybe less catastrophic) collapse mechanism. To
do this the structural engineer would have to increase the MP value at section 3 by 4MP, or at section 1 by
0.5MP or at section 4 by 0.67MP. Clearly, if say the engineer does not want the column to collapse
(that being catastrophic), he would have to increase the MP of the column at section 1 to a little
over 1.5MP. If that were done, in this case, sections 2, 3, and 4 would then form the mechanism, i.e. a
less catastrophic beam mechanism.
III. Next, we look for the existence of an alternate collapse mechanism. For each variable θj, the reduced
cost gives the increase in the target cell (z) for a unit change in the variable θj. Thus the reduced cost of
all the basic variables, i.e. the plastic hinges must be zero for the optimal conditions (i.e. minimum λ).
Thus, if any reduced cost is zero for a non-basic variable (infinite Allowable Increase), there can be an
alternate collapse mechanism having the same load factor because this non-basic variable could be
brought into the basis to form another collapse mechanism without increasing the plastic collapse load
factor. Here there is not any alternate collapse mechanism since all the variables with infinite
Allowable Increase have non-zero Reduced Costs.
226
Second Edition
IV. Finally we draw the BMD at collapse.

p 
m C = [B b 0 ]  α 
λ
 m1   11 0 0   1 0 0    − 1.0M P 
m  
3   p1   1 3
1 −  1 −   − 1M P  − 0.6M 
 2 =  2 2 p  =  2 2  2M  =  P
m 3   0 1 0  2  0 1 0  P
  2.0M P 
   1 5  λ L   1 5  MP   
m 4  − 2 1 −    − 1 −  1.4 L L  − 1.0M P 
2  2 2
Check that the bending moment everywhere is less than the particular plastic moment of resistance of the
member. If so, we have correctly chosen the critical sections C that will produce the smallest value of λ.
And hence the Yield Condition is met and λ is the unique collapse load factor according to the
Uniqueness Theorem. If the yield condition were not met, we would have reduced the estimate of critical
plastic collapse factor as follows.
M Exceeding
λ Pr educed = λ P
MP
And we would say that the true critical collapse load factor lies between
λ Pr educed < λ Ptrue < λ P
227
Second Edition
3.3.4.2 Parabolic Arch
Given MP = 590kNm
228
Second Edition
3.3.4.3 Displacements and Rotations at Collapse
229
Second Edition
230
Second Edition
3.3.5 Plastic Limit Analysis of Rectangular Multi-Storey Multi-Bay Frames with Improved Data
Generation
(a) Select critical sections inclusive of articulation C*, identify the degree of static indeterminacy with articulation
ignored α∗, and establish the sign convention for positive bending moments and rotations
Critical sections inclusive of articulation C* are identified.
α for plane frames with articulation = 3 (number of windows or cells) – releases r
α∗ for plane frames with articulation ignored = 3 (number of windows or cells)
Bending moments and rotations are defined as positive if they cause tension or extension at the side with the
dotted lines. For multi-storey multi-bay buildings, the dotted line is drawn under beams and on the right of
columns by convention.
(b) Formulate the equilibrium law equations
p 
m C * = [B b 0 ]  α * 
 λ 
(i) 3 self equilibrating BMDs (due to shear, bending and axial actions) for each cell (sign convention applies)
Note that C* is the number of critical sections inclusive of those originally articulated and α∗ is the degree
of static indeterminacy with all articulation ignored. The articulation positions will thus also be regarded
and denoted as critical sections. Hence, each cell will contribute 3 indeterminate forces and hence 3
columns in the B matrix. Fill in the B matrix column-by-column with the bending moment values of the 3
normalized cell self-equilibrating BMDs at the critical section positions of C*.
(ii) 1 load equilibrating BMD for the load factor λ (sign convention applies)
Vertical loads are transferred through simply supported beams, and hence MMAX = PL/4 if central load.
Horizontal loads are transferred through cantilever action and multiple loads on the same column have their
independent BMDs superimposed upon each other.
(c) Formulate the mesh kinematic linear program for the plastic limit analysis of the frame and solve the LP
Set the MP value of the real articulation (hinges) to zero in the MPT matrix.
 b T − b T0  & 1 
minimise λ = M P θ&* 2 C* subject to  T0 θ = 
T
T  *
B − B  0 
positivity condition θ&* ≥ 0
Solve the LP and perform sensitivity analysis as before.
231
Second Edition
3.3.5.1 Two Storey Frame With Concentrated Loading
232
Second Edition
233
Second Edition
3.3.5.2 Three Storey Frame With Distributed Load
An unbraced and rigid-jointed frame fabricated from S275 steel with pinned bases is shown. An investigation of the
possibility of elasto-plastic instability is to be carried out to establish what load factor, applied to the given load
would be required to cause such a failure.
The equilibrium equations are
234
Second Edition
And the Sensitivity Report,
235
Second Edition
The collapse load factor λPmin is 1.514

The basic variables as of the final tableau are those with finite allowable increase in the cost coefficient MP
+ +
θ10 0.001738488 θ39 0
+ -
θ13 0.001738488 θ1 0.000977899
+
θ15 0.000977899 -θ14 0.000977899
+ -
θ24 0 θ28 0.000760588
+
θ27 0 θ40
-
0
Conversely, a non-basic variable is one with an infinite allowable increase in the cost coefficient MP.
Amongst these, a potential basic variable is one with also a zero reduced cost. Here there is not any.
Hence, there cannot be an alternate collapse mechanism, and the one predicted is unique.
A unique bending moment distribution is obtainable if and only if there are α*+1 active participating hinges.
Here, α*+1 = 10, and the number of active participating hinges is 6 from above.
Hence, the exact bending moment distribution at collapse is not unique and is indeterminate.
Plastic collapse load factor, λP = 1.51
236
Second Edition
3.3.5.3 Multi-Bay Portal Frame
237
Second Edition
238
Second Edition
3.3.5.4 Vierendeel Truss
239
Second Edition
3.3.6.1 Plastic Collapse Analysis by Solving Equilibrium Equations
The linear programming simplex method described above performs the plastic collapse analysis meeting the
fundamental theoretical requirements as follows
(i) The equilibrium equation is employed, hence satisfying the equilibrium condition
(ii) Many different collapse mechanisms is postulated, hence satisfying the mechanism condition, and a linear
solving algorithm is used to find the smallest λ
(iii) The yield condition is automatically met since λ is minimized assuming that the chosen critical sections
contains the critical mechanism.
The hand method of plastic collapse analysis for simple structures of low degrees of static indeterminacies and a
small number of critical sections is as follows
(i) The equilibrium equation is employed, hence satisfying the equilibrium condition
(ii) A collapse mechanism is postulated i.e. values and signs of the assumed bending moments MP is put into
the bending moment at collapse {m} vector, hence satisfying the mechanism condition, and λ is solved for.
(iii) Then {m} is computed and it is ensured that at no point of the structure, the bending moment is greater
than the local MP value, hence satisfying the yield condition. Hence, naturally the smallest λ is found.
Given simple frame with beam 2MP and columns MP subject to vertical 4λ and horizontal 1λ loading as shown.
The plastic collapse load factor is required.
4λ
2 3 4
λ
α=2
L
C=4
1
2L
Appreciate that to form a mechanism we need α + 1 plastic hinges. Postulate Mechanism Condition with hinges at
1, 3 and 4.
4λ
2 3 4
λ
Formulate the equilibrium conditions noting the sign convention for positive bending moments and rotations. For
bending moments, tension is positive and for rotations, extension is positive. 4λ
0 -0.5 P2
-1.5 0 -2.5
1 1 λ
0.5
1
1 0 0
P1
P1=1 diagram P2=1 diagram λ=1/L diagram
240
Second Edition
The Equilibrium Conditions are then
− M P   1
1 0 0 
 3
p   M  1 −   p1 
m C = [B b 0 ]  α   2 = 2 2 p 
λ  2M P   0 1 0  2
   1 5  λ L 
 − M P
− 1 −  
 2 2
Sign convention for
extension positive Sign convention for
tension positive
Solve the equations simultaneously.

(1): p1 = −MP
(3): p2 = 2MP
(4): −MP = −0.5(−MP) + 2MP –2.5λL
thus, λ = 1.4MP/L
(2): M2 = 0.5(−MP) + 2MP – 1.5(1.4MP/L)L
= −0.6MP
Check that everywhere M ≤ MP. Here, OK. Thus Yield Condition met. Since mechanism condition, equilibrium
condition and yield condition attained, the Uniqueness Theorem achieved.
Note that we only need a load-equilibrating BMD (that not necessarily satisfies compatibility) for the external load
whilst the BMD for the releases should satisfy compatibility. Let us try a different load-equilibrating diagram that
DOES NOT satisfy compatibility, say pinned beams and cantilever columns. Postulate the same mechanism.
4λ
 MP   1 0 − 1 0 0
 M   0.5  p1 
 2 = 1 0    λ
p2
 2M P   0 1 2   2
     λL 
− M P  − 0.5 1 0   1
Solving these equations simultaneously will again result in λ = 1.4MP/L. But now, p1 = 0.4MP and p2 = −0.8MP.
The values of p1 and p2 are no longer physically meaningful. Before it used to be the values of the indeterminate
forces, now it is meaningless because of the non-compatible load-equilibrating BMD.
An example design of a portal frame with haunches is presented.
241
Second Edition
242
Second Edition
243
Second Edition
3.3.6.2 Plastic Collapse Analysis by Virtual Work (Hobbs)
244
Second Edition
245
Second Edition
3.3.6.3 Plastic Collapse Analysis by Virtual Work (Chryssanthopoulos)
246
Second Edition
247
Second Edition
248
Second Edition
249
Second Edition
250
Second Edition
251
Second Edition
252
Second Edition
253
Second Edition
254
Second Edition
255
Second Edition
256
Second Edition
257
Second Edition
258
Second Edition
259
Second Edition
260
Second Edition
261
Second Edition
3.4 GNL, MNL, Contact Nonlinear Static and Buckling Analysis by The Implicit Tracing The
Equilibrium Path Method
3.4.1 Mathematical Formulation of Tracing the Equilibrium Path


MNL, GL Plastic
U
It is instructive to define a few important terms.
Definition of Equilibrium States and Paths
A pair of (λ,{U}) satisfying the geometrically nonlinear equilibrium

conditions between the external nodal {P} loads and the component
Equilibrium state
forces {f}, given the compatibility relationship between {d} and {U} as
well as the constitutive law relating {f} to {d}
Equilibrium path A continuous line of equilibrium states
An equilibrium path that includes the initial unloaded state (λ=0,

Fundamental equilibrium path
{U}={0})
An equilibrium path that does not include the initial unloaded state (λ=0,
Secondary equilibrium path
{U}={0})
An equilibrium path for which the displacements are zero for all levels of
Trivial fundamental path
loading i.e. (λ≠0,{U}={0})
262
Second Edition
The static equilibrium equation has been established, and is restated in all its simplicity.
[K T ]δ{U} = δ{P}
where [K T ] = [K E ] + [K G ]
where [K E ] = [T ] [[k E ]][T ]
T

Ω
 ∂2 d 
and [K G ] = [T]T [[k G ]][T] +  {f }
 ∂{U}∂ U 
 ∂ ε2
  ∂ 2 Wi   ∂ 2 Wn 
for which [k G ] = ∫  {{σ}n + {σ}i − [ D]{ε}i }dΩ −   − λ  
Ω
 ∂{d}∂ d   ∂{d}∂ d   ∂{d}∂ d 
and {σ}n = [D][B]{d}
and [
Ω
T
i
Ω
T
i
Ω
Τ
[KT] = tangent stiffness matrix

[KE] = instantaneous stiffness of the system with modified geometry as [T] dependent upon {U}
[KG] = geometric stiffness matrix
[KT], [KE] and [KG] are all symmetric.

As stated, we have omitted the second order variation of work due to the external nodal loadings {P} from the
 ∂2W   ∂{P}   ∂W 
−  = −  as {P} =  
 ∂{U}∂ U   ∂ U   ∂{U}
of work due to loads applied on the finite elements is obviously still taken into account.
In order to find the buckling load, we could in theory perform a nonlinear eigenvalue solution. The nonlinear
eigenvalue problem is expressed as
[KT]{φ}={0}
The nontrivial solution is obtained by solving for the eigenvalue λ from
det | [KT] | = 0
This is quite a complex solution scheme is thus is not usually attempted. As closed-form mathematical solutions of
realistic multi-degree of freedom nonlinear eigenvalue problems are highly complex, incremental methods to
establish the equilibrium path is used. The incremental procedures can correspond to an increment of displacement
or an increment of loading, i.e. displacement control or load control. The incremental approach is normally started
from the initial unloaded equilibrium state, in which case the fundamental path is traced. In the vicinity of
bifurcation states, it is essential that small incremental steps be used so as to avoid a jump from the fundamental
path to a different path.
263
Second Edition
Tracing the Nonlinear Equilibrium Path

λ
λi
{G}j ESi
Full Newton
∆λ Raphson
{P}j
{R}j
λi-1 ESi-1
U
Ui-1 ∆U Ui
{G} j = current out-of-balance force

{R} j = [T] T {f} = current resistance force
{P} j ={∂W/∂{U}}= current external nodal loading
The vector {f} includes the fixed end forces which are negative terms here. It is equivalent then to add those terms
to the {P} vector and call it the equivalent nodal loading vector if we desire; however the mathematics will work
out nevertheless as the fixed end forces are included within {f} as negative terms. Now, in order to trace the
nonlinear load path, we formulate a set of linear equations valid over a small load or displacement step.
[KT]δ{U} = δ{P}
This is the linearized equilibrium equation valid as long as [KT] is approximately constant over the displacement or
load step. We can also rewrite the above equation as
[KT]δ{U} = −{G}
where {G} is the out-of-balance force between the equivalent loads and the resistance forces. In this way, there will
be no accumulation of error as the load steps are traced.
To trace the nonlinear equilibrium path, we ascertain i successive equilibrium states

Between two successive equilibrium states j iterations are performed,
∆{U}j is solved from [KT]∆{U}j= −{G}j where {G} j ={R} j -{P} j
∆{U}= ∆{U} + ∆{U}j
The Full Newton-Raphson recalculates [KT] at every j whilst the Modified Newton Raphson uses
initial [KT] at beginning of iteration i
Next j until out-of-balance force {G} ≈ 0, hence equilibrium state
Next i noting that change in out-of-balance force δ{G} ≈ 0 signifies a limit point.
264
Second Edition
Iterative Method Description Advantages Disadvantages

[KT] calculated at every Many [KT]-1 required
Newton-Raphson Less iterations
iteration in inner loop for inner loop
Modified [KT] calculated once before Only one [KT]-1 required
More iterations
Newton-Raphson an iteration in inner loop for inner loop
The modified Newton-Raphson is efficient when there is no strain hardening or an unloading path is not required,
otherwise the Newton-Raphson is required for convergence.
We start with load control. Load control used for ascending portions of the equilibrium path. When close to a
bifurcation point, load control is used with small steps. Then when close to a limit point, displacement control is
used. Displacement control is also used for descending parts of the equilibrium path. Then, if we come to a limit
point in the displacement sense, we revert to load control or use another displacement parameter.
3.4.2 Newton-Raphson Load Control, Displacement Control or Arc-Length Control Algorithm
Advancing Phase
1. Determine an increment (of load, displacement or arc length) to trace on the equilibrium path from ESi-1 to ESi
2. Determine an estimate of the tangent stiffness at ESi-1, KTi-1
3. Determine the predicted displacement increment to move forward by solving the equilibrium equations
[KTi-1]∆{U}Pi-1 = −{G}i-1
4. Calculate the element resisting force {R}i-1
5. Calculate the unbalanced force {G}i-1 and check for convergence. If converged, i.e. {G} ≈ 0, then go to 1 with i =
i +1. If not converged go to 6.
Iteration (or Correcting) Phase
6. Determine an estimate of the tangent stiffness at ESj

ESj = ESi-1 then Modified Newton Raphson
ESj = ESj then Full Newton Raphson
7. Determine displacement increment due to the unbalanced force
[KTi-1]∆{U}Cj = −{G}j-1 for Modified Newton Raphson where j – 1 = i – 1
[KTj]∆{U}Cj = −{G}j-1 for Full Newton Raphson where j – 1 = i – 1
8. Calculate the element resisting force {R}j
9. Calculate the unbalanced force {G}j and check for convergence. If converged, i.e. {G} ≈ 0, then go to 1 with i = i
+ 1. If not converged go to 6 with j = j + 1. If divergence occurs, then go to 1 with trying a smaller load step.
Note that no convergence can be achieved if the total applied load is greater than the buckling load. The Full
Newton-Raphson procedure can be expensive and unnecessary when the solution is close to convergence.
265
Second Edition
3.4.3 Equilibrium Paths, Stability of Equilibrium Paths, Critical Points, Stability of Critical Points
Apart from the linear eigenvalue method (linear elastic buckling) and nonlinear tracing the equilibrium path,
stability if an elastic system can be interpreted by means of the concept of minimum potential energy. An elastic
system always tend to go to a state in which the total potential energy is at a minimum. The types of instability
include: -
(I) Bifurcation instability (For perfect systems – SOL 105)
(i) Stable symmetric bifurcation

(ii) Unstable symmetric bifurcation
(iii) Asymmetric bifurcation
(II) Limit load instability (For imperfect systems – SOL 106)
Bifurcation instability can be analyzed using linear buckling analysis whilst limit load instability is analyzed by
tracing the equilibrium path.
Load
Stable symmetric bifurcation
Unstable symmetric bifurcation

Asymmetric bifurcation
Limit load instability
Deflection
The energy method of stability analysis involves the following: -
(i) Obtain the total potential energy function V = U – P∆

(ii) Obtain the equilibrium paths by solving for
∂V
=0
∂θ
where for a SDOF system, a perfect system yields 2 solutions, one θ = 0 and the other P in terms of
θ whilst an imperfect system gives one solution for P in terms of θ.
(iii) Investigate the stability of the equilibrium paths
∂2V
>0 for regions of stability
∂θ 2
∂2V
<0 for regions of instability
∂θ 2
(iv) Identify the critical points (i.e. the boundaries between stability and instability – bifurcation or
limit points). For the perfect system, the critical point is the bifurcation point. This is obtain by
inspection θ = 0, P = Pcr. Alternatively, the two solutions of (ii) is put into
∂2V
=0
∂θ 2
266
Second Edition
separately to yield two values defining the bifurcation point. We can also identify the limits points
for imperfect systems by differentiating the equilibrium path equation, i.e. dP/dθ = 0. Hence we
shall obtain value for θ at the limit point, θlp which subsequently is replaced into P for the value of
the critical point, Plp.
(v) Investigate the stability of the critical point. The bifurcation point (θ = 0, P = Pcr) or the limit point
(θ = θlp, P = Plp) is replaced into the third derivative of V.
≠0 ∂ 3V
Unstable
∂θ 3
=0
<0 ∂ 4V >0
Unstable Stable
∂θ 4
=0
Repeat with higher

derivative
=0
Neutral stability
Increment of total potential energy, ∆V = δV + δ 2 V + ...

For equilibrium δV = 0 (principle of minimum potential energy),
Increment of total potential energy around equilibrium state, ∆V = δ 2 V + ...
1 T ∂2V 
= δ{U}   δ{U} + ...
2  ∂{U}∂ U 
δ{U} [K T ]δ{U} + ...
1
=
T
An equilibrium state is stable if ∆V is positive for all possible infinitesimal disturbances δ{U}. This implies that an
agent external to the system will have to perform positive work in order to cause δ{U}.
Stability of Equilibrium State ES
Gaussian elimination on [KT] leads to all positive diagonals,

δ2V positive
Thoroughly stable ES i.e. δ2V = 0.5 δ{U}T[KT]δ{U} > 0 for all δ{U}
definite
or det ([KT]) > 0
Gaussian elimination leads to at least one negative diagonal term,

δ2V admits
Thoroughly unstable ES i.e. δ2V = 0.5 δ{U}T[KT]δ{U} < 0 for some δ{U} = δ{U0}
negative values
or det ([KT]) < 0
267
Second Edition
Critically stable or Gaussian elimination leads to at least one zero diagonal term,
δ2V positive
unstable ES i.e. δ2V = 0.5 δ{U}T[KT]δ{U} = 0 for some δ{U} = δ{U0}
semi-definite
i.e. a critical point or det ([KT]) = 0
A critical point (buckling point) can be a bifurcation or a limit point. At a critical point det ([KT]) = 0, i.e. KT is
singular indicating the presence of an infinitesimally adjacent equilibrium state at the same level of loading. A
critical point is normally associated with one buckling mode δ{U0}. Bifurcation points are very rare in real
structures due to the presence of imperfections in the geometry and due to pre-buckling displacements.
Nature of Critical Point
A critical point is a bifurcation point if and only if the first order

work done by {Pn} over the buckling mode(s) δ{U0} is zero.
Bifurcation point {Pn}Tδ{U0} = 0
Loading can be increased further along at least one of the
bifurcation paths.
A critical point is a limit point if and only if the first order work
Limit point done by {Pn} over the buckling mode(s) δ{U0} is non-zero. {Pn}Tδ{U0} ≠ 0
Loading cannot be increased further.
268
Second Edition
3.4.4.1 GNL, MNL Load Control, Displacement Control or Arc-Length Control Static Analysis
All cards applicable to SOL 101 are also applicable to SOL 106.
SOL 106
DISPLACEMENT(<PRINT,PUNCH,PLOT>) = ALL/<Grid Set ID>

NLSTRESS = (<PRINT,PUNCH,PLOT>) = ALL/<Element Set ID>
BOUTPUT = ALL $ Slideline Contact Output Request
$
SUBCASE 1
NLPARM = < ID in Bulk Data NLPARM >
$
SUBCASE 2
NLPARM = < ID in Bulk Data NLPARM >
$ BULK DATA
PARAM, AUTOSPC, NO $ AUTOSPC NO By Default
PARAM, FOLLOWK, YES $ Includes Follower Force Stiffness
PARAM, LGDISP, 1 $ Includes Large Displacement Effects i.e. [T] not constant
PARAM, LANGLE, 2 $ Rotation Vector Approach for Large Rotations
PARAM, K6ROT, 100 $ Shell normal rotation restrained in nonlinear analysis
Incremental
NINC
NLPARM ID Time For KMETHOD KSTEP MAXITER CONV INTOUT
(<1000)
Creep, DT
EPSU EPSP EPSW MAXDIV MAXQN MAXLS FSTRESS LSTOL
MAXBIS MAXR RTOLB
Unlike linear analyses schemes, nonlinear analysis schemes (SOL 106 and SOL 129) employ subcases on an
incremental basis, instead of separate load cases and boundary conditions. In linear analysis, subcases represent an
independent loading condition. Each subcase is distinct from each other. Nonlinear static analysis permits only one
independent loading condition per run. For SOL 106, the bulk data loads and prescribed displacements are
measured from the initial configuration. Hence latter subcases should refer to different load cards that have
magnitudes that include the magnitude of load cards from previous subcases. Hence, if the same point is being
loaded or displaced in a subsequent subcase, the load or displacement value referred by the subsequent subcase
should be relative to the initial undeflected value of zero and not that of the previous subcase. Subcases are hence
269
Second Edition
cumulative. Loads and boundary conditions at the end of a subcase are the initial conditions for the next subcase.
Hence if the load description is inadvertently omitted in subsequent subcases, the load will automatically be
removed in an incremental fashion. Only one independent loading history can be applied during an analysis. In
general, a different loading sequence requires a complete new analysis. The load to be applied during a particular
stage (i.e. subcase) is referred to by the LOAD Case Control Command. NINC in the NLPARM bulk data entry is
an integer that specifies the number of increments in the particular subcase, by default 10. The more linear the
problem is, the smaller the value of NINC that can be acceptable. But when nonlinearity is significant such as at the
onset of plasticity, at regions of stress concentration where each load step causes high stress changes, at contact
regions with high forces and at the onset of buckling, the incremental load should be small (i.e. NINC must be
large). Hence different subcases should be used to model different regions along the load path. Where nonlinearity
of stiffness is small, NINC can be small, and when nonlinearity is large, NINC must be large. The load specified in
a particular subcase minus the load specified in the preceding subcase is equally divided by NINC to obtain the
incremental load for the particular subcase. Clearly, if convergence is a problem, this incremental load should be
made smaller (by increasing NINC and/or decreasing the magnitude of load specified in the particular subcase
relative to the previous subcase) until convergence. Self-weight and/or prestressed elements must be simulated by
incorporating an initial load case followed by whatever static loading load case. Each subcase should not have
NINC exceeding 1000 to control the database size, output size and restarts.
The following can be performed with multiple subcases:

(i) Loads can be changed, naturally
(ii) Boundary conditions, i.e. SPC can be changed
(iii) Solution strategy in NLPARM
The follower force is calculated and incorporated by the use of PARAM, FOLLOWK, YES. We know how the
prestress affects the differential stiffness, namely a tensile prestress causing an increase in stiffness. The effect of the
follower force on the stiffness is different. For example, for a cylinder under external pressure critical buckling load may
be over-estimated (even though the mode shapes are similar) in a SOL 105 and the natural frequencies in vibration may
be under-estimated (even though the mode shapes are similar) in a SOL 103 in the absence of follower stiffness. To the
contrary, these observations are reversed in case of centrifugal loads. Centrifugal forces as a constant (static) load are
applied by a Bulk Data RFORCE to any elements that have masses. The follower stiffness due to centrifugal load has the
effect of lowering stiffness (although the centrifugal load tensioning effect increases stiffness), consequently lowering
natural frequencies (even though the mode shapes are similar) in a SOL 103 and lowering the buckling loads (even
though the mode shapes are similar) in a SOL 105. This effect increases as the RPM increases, and it becomes significant
when the RPM is over 1000. For moderately geometric nonlinear analysis, exclusion of follower stiffness affects the rate
of convergence, but the converged solution is correct. For severely geometric nonlinear analysis, it may not be
possible to obtain a converged solution without including follower stiffness. As the geometric nonlinearity
intensifies, so is the effect of follower stiffness. Therefore, inclusion of follower stiffness greatly enhances the
convergence if the deformation involves severe geometric nonlinearity.
Output requests for each subcase are processed independently, but are appended after computation for output
purposes. The INTOUT field is specified with YES, NO or ALL and determines whether the output is requested
for each load increment within a subcase or just the last load step of the subcases.
YES Output requested for every computed converged load increment within the subcases
NO Output requested for only the last converged load increment of the subcases
ALL Output requested for every computed and user specified load increment within the subcase
INTOUT is especially important for restarts. For Newton’s iteration methods (i.e. without NLPCI) the option ALL
is equivalent to YES but not when arc length methods (with NLPCI) are used.
3.4.4.1.1 Increment Methods (Load Control, Displacement Control or Arc-Length Method)
Load control is specified by having load card definitions. Naturally, the LOAD case control command is required.
Load cards relevant to SOL 101 is also relevant to SOL 106 except for DEFORM cards. The applicable load cards
are FORCEi, MOMENTi, PLOADi. GRAV, TEMP, SPC, SPCD etc. Loads which are stationary in direction
throughout the analysis include: -
270
Second Edition
(i) FORCE, MOMENT, SLOAD

(ii) PLOAD1
(iii) GRAV
Loads which follow the motion of the grid or the element (i.e. follower forces that produce stiffness terms) include
(i) FORCE1, FORCE2, MOMENT1, MOMENT2
(ii) PLOAD, PLOAD2, PLOAD4, PLOADX1
(iii) RFORCE
(iv) TEMP, TEMPD, TEMPP1, TEMPP3, TEMPRB
Displacement control is specified by having SPCD card definitions, noting that grid points with displacements
enforced by SPCD must also have an SPC entry. Note that enforced displacement can also be specified directly on
the SPC bulk data entry, although this method is not recommended. Naturally, the LOAD case control command is
required.
Arc-length control is specified by having load card definitions and also a NLPCI card with the same ID as the
NLPARM card. Arc-length control cannot be used in conjunction with displacement control SPCD cards. The arc-
length method is useful to trace unstable or post-buckling equilibrium paths defined by negative load control steps.
The critical buckling load can be estimated by Newton’s load control method by performing the nonlinear static
analysis until the solution cannot be obtained due to divergence, in which case the adaptive bisection method is
activated in the vicinity of the critical buckling load and stops at the limit load close to the critical buckling load.
But beyond that, the load control method does not work, and hence the arc-length method is required.
MAXR on the NLPARM card is the maximum ratio for the adjusted arc-length increment relative to the initial
value, by default 20.0. The TYPE field on the NLPCI card could be CRIS (default), RIKS or MRIKS.
3.4.4.1.2 Stiffness Update Strategy (AUTO, SEMI or ITER using KSTEP)
The load is divided up into load steps. Each load step is then divided into iteration steps. KMETHOD specifies the
method for controlling stiffness updates, whether AUTO (default), SEMI or ITER.
With AUTO, NASTRAN automatically selects the most efficient strategy of when to update the tangent stiffness
matrix based on convergence rates. The matrix could be updated in the middle of an iteration and will not be
necessarily be updated at the beginning of the load step. AUTO is a good starting method. It essentially examines
the solution convergence rate and uses the quasi-Newton, line search and/or bisection convergence acceleration
methods to perform the solution as efficiently as possible without a stiffness matrix update. Highly nonlinear
behaviour in some cases may not be handled effectively using AUTO. For AUTO (like SEMI), the stiffness matrix
is updated on convergence if KSTEP is less than the number of iterations that was required for convergence with
the current stiffness.
SEMI is similar to AUTO (it also uses the quasi-Newton, line search and/or bisection convergence acceleration
methods) except that the tangent stiffness matrix will also be updated at the beginning of each load step,
irrespective of the convergence status. Hence SEMI provides better convergence at the expense of higher cost. The
SEMI method is an efficient method for nonlinear static iteration. For SEMI (like AUTO), the stiffness matrix is
updated on convergence if KSTEP is less than the number of iterations that was required for convergence with the
current stiffness.
With ITER, the stiffness matrix is updated at every KSTEP iteration. KSTEP specifies the number of iterations
before the stiffness update, 5 by default. It is a ‘brute force’ method. It can be most suited for highly nonlinear
problems. Full Newton-Raphson is obtained by selecting KMETHOD = ITER and KSTEP = 1. Modified Newton-
Raphson is obtained by selecting KMETHOD = ITER and KSTEP = MAXITER.
271
Second Edition
3.4.4.1.3 Convergence Acceleration Techniques (Quasi-Newton MAXQN, Line Search using MAXLS and
LSTOL, Bisection using MAXITER, RTOLB, MAXBIS and MAXDIV)
The convergence acceleration techniques include quasi-Newton, line search and bisection.
The stiffness updating schemes can be supplemented with quasi-Newton (QN) updates. MAXQN is the maximum
number of quasi-Newton correction vectors to be saved on the database, equal to MAXITER by default. The BFGS
update is performed if MAXQN > 0.
The line search is controlled by MAXLS and LSTOL. MAXLS is the maximum number of linear searches
allowed for each iteration, default 4. LSTOL requires a real number between 0.01 and 0.9 to specify the tolerance
for the line search operation, default 0.5. The line search operation will be conducted if the error defining the
divergence rate is greater than LSTOL. Computing cost for each line search is comparable to that of an iteration.
MAXITER specifies the limit on number of iterations for each load increment, 25 by default. If the solution does
not converge at MAXITER iterations, the load increment is bisected and the analysis is repeated. Bisection is also
activated if RTOLB, by default 20.0 is exceeded. RTOLB is the maximum value of incremental rotation (in
degrees) allowed per iteration before bisection is activated. MAXBIS specifies the maximum number of bisections
for each load increment, 5 by default. If MAXBIS is positive, the stiffness matrix is updated on the first divergence
and the load increment is bisected on the second divergence. If MAXBIS is negative, the load increment is bisected
every time the solution diverges until the limit on bisection is reached. If |MAXBIS| has been attained and the
solution still has not converged then the value on MAXDIV, which specifies the divergence criteria for an
iteration, 3 by default, is considered. If MAXDIV is positive, the best attainable solution is computed and the
analysis is continued to next load increment. If MAXDIV is negative, the analysis is terminated. Hence, if we want
the analysis to terminate if convergence has not been achieved, MAXDIV must be negative, not the default value.
The recommended value for MAXDIV is thus −3.
3.4.4.1.4 Convergence Criteria (CONV, EPSU, EPSP, EPSW)
The convergence test is performed at every iteration. CONV specifies the flags to select convergence criteria, UPW
or any combination, note default PW. EPSU is the error tolerance for displacement error (U) convergence criteria.
EPSP is the error tolerance for load equilibrium error (P) convergence criteria. EPSW is the error tolerance for
work error (W) convergence criteria. If displacement control is used, then there is a need for tighter tolerances for
convergence. There is a facility to provide a default value depending on the type of analysis, type of elements and
desired accuracy by specifying the NLTOL parameter and leaving the CONV, EPSU, EPSP and EPSW fields in the
NLPARM blank. Models with gap, contact or heat transfer elements will have tighter default convergences.
$ BULK DATA
PARAM, NLTOL, ITOL
ITOL is an integer designating the level of tolerance as

0 (very high)
1 (high)
2 (engineering design)
3 (preliminary design)
Default convergence tolerances are as follows.
No Gaps, Contact or With Gaps or Contact

NLTOL Designation With Heat Transfer
Heat Transfer Elements Elements
EPSP=1.0E-3 EPSP=1.0E-3 EPSP=1.0E-3
0 Very High
EPSW=1.0E-7 EPSW=1.0E-7 EPSW=1.0E-7
272
Second Edition
(Default)
EPSP=1.0E-2
1 High
EPSW=1.0E-3
EPSP=1.0E-2 EPSP=1.0E-3
2 Engineering EPSW=1.0E-2 EPSW=1.0E-5
(Default) (Default)
EPSP=1.0E-1
3 Preliminary
EPSW=1.0E-1
The quality of the mesh is essential in nonlinear analysis. Artificial stress concentrations due to poor modelling
such as when beams interface with a shell mesh without special handling techniques will cause convergence
difficulty. The mesh should also be adequately fine for good stress recovery, hence a h-element convergence
exercise must be undertaken. This could probably be performed by repetitive linear analysis, the resulting
converged mesh can be used with confidence in a nonlinear analysis. Other steps that can be taken to improve
convergence are increase the number of load increments, break applied load into multiple subcases, use a more
general material stress-strain definition instead of a bilinear model, avoid poorly shaped elements in regions of high
stresses and introduce initial load steps in the solution to establish equilibrium in the model prior to increasing the
nonlinearity. Contact regions should have a fine mesh in order to capture the contact stresses. If large deformations
are expected to distort elements such that their accuracy may be called into question, it may be worthwhile to
manually distort the elements in the opposite direction somewhat before starting the solution so that the final shape
will be closer to the ideal shape.
3.4.4.1.5 Nonlinear Finite Elements in MSC.NASTRAN
Nature of Nonlinearity of Stiffness

Constant With {U}
Large Strain Effect

Element Force and
Constant With {ε}

Stiffness i.e. From
[B] Not Constant

Hyperelastic i.e.
Nonlinearity
Nonlinearity
Work Done
Differential
i.e. [D] Not

i.e. [T] Not
Geometric
Damping
With {d}
Stiffness
Material
Element
Mass
CBAR
PBAR Yes No Yes No Yes No No
MAT1 (MATT1)
CBUSH
No Yes Yes No No No Yes
PBUSH and PBUSHT
CBUSH1D
Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes No Yes
PBUSH1D
CROD
PROD Yes No Yes Yes Yes No Yes
MAT1 (MATT1), MATS1
CONROD
Yes No Yes Yes Yes No Yes
MAT1 (MATT1)
CTUBE
PTUBE Yes No Yes Yes Yes No Yes
MAT1 (MATT1)
CBEAM
PBEAM Yes No Yes Yes Yes No Yes
MAT1 (MATT1), MATS1
CQUAD4, CTRIA3 Yes No Yes Yes Yes No Yes
273
Second Edition
PSHELL
MAT1 (MATT1), MAT2
(MATT2), MAT8, MATS1,
CREEP
CQUAD8, CTRIA6
PSHELL Yes No Yes No Yes No No
MAT1 (MATT1), MAT2
CQUAD4, CTRIA3
PLPLANE Yes No Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes
MATHP
CQUAD8, CTRIA6
PLPLANE Yes No Yes No Yes Yes No
MATHP
CHEXA, CPENTA, CTETRA
PSOLID
Yes No Yes Yes Yes No Yes
MAT1 (MATT1), MAT9
(MATT9), MATS1, CREEP
CHEXA, CPENTA, CTETRA
PLSOLID Yes No Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes
MATHP
Note that the CBAR element is not a nonlinear element i.e. its coordinates are not updated as the element
deforms.
The CBUSH is a generalized nonlinear spring - linear damper element. The CBUSH1D is a rod-type nonlinear
spring - nonlinear damper element; it is a 1D version of the CBUSH element with added features. The CBUSH is
NOT geometrically nonlinear, only materially. The CBUSH1D element can have geometric and material
nonlinearity. The CBUSH1D element is the only element which can model rotation damping such as for
modelling tuned pendulums mass dampers.
The CROD, CONROD, CTUBE elements can be used to model cables as these elements are geometrically
nonlinear, incorporates the differential stiffness and can refer to different stress-strain curves for tension and
compression.
CGAP element can also be used to work in the opposite sense to a contact element in order to function as a cable
element. That is to say, the element can be made to work only in tension by specifying a separation distance
corresponding to the taut condition, above which the element is to be turned on and resist tension.
The CBEAM element can model plastic hinges at its ends for plastic collapse analysis of frameworks. For this,
the material type specified in the MATS1 card must be elastic-plastic (and perfectly plastic too) i.e. TYPE
PLASTIC, and strictly not nonlinear elastic. The CBEAM is assumed to have its nonlinearity concentrated at its
ends. Obviously if material nonlinearity is enabled, there can be no pin flags. The user need not specify the cross-
section axis about which the yielding occurs, since the implementation allows for combinations of bending
moments in two directions plus an axial load. The flexibility of the plastic hinge is based upon eight idealized rods
at each end, chosen to match the total area, center of gravity and moments of inertia of the cross section.
Note that rigid body elements RBEi, RBAR and RROD do not rotate in geometric nonlinear analysis i.e. their
coordinates are not updated as the element deforms and hence are not nonlinear elements. Geometric stiffness is
also not computed for rigid elements. Offsets are not recommended in nonlinear analysis, or even linearized
buckling analysis. Overly stiff elements, as replacements are also not recommended as they may cause problems
with convergence (MAXRATIO exceeded). Too stiff will give you mathematical problems and too flexible will
create too soft a connection. Thankfully what you might consider "very stiff" is numerically still likely to be OK. In
number terms you want something that is maybe 1000X stiffer than the local structure. If you are still unsure try 2
274
Second Edition
runs, with one having a bar 10 times stiffer than the other. If the answers are similar then you know it is stiff
enough. To estimate the stiffness of the structure at that point connecting the gap, use simple beam formulae such
as 12EI/L3 or 3EI/L3 or alternatively, apply an arbitrary load and ascertain the displacement from a SOL 101 static
analysis.
Midside grids on solid elements are not allowed for nonlinear analysis.
3.4.4.1.6 Contact Nonlinearity
There are three primary types of contact elements, namely point-to-point contact gap elements (CGAP), line-to-
line or surface-to-surface slide line contact elements (BLSEG) and general arbitrary line-to-line or surface-
to-surface contact elements.
The CGAP element is a point-to-point contact element. Its element coordinate system is defined depending on
whether the end grids points are coincident or not. If coincident, the orientation is defined by using the coordinate
system CID, which if unspecified would default to the basic system. If the grid points are not coincident, the
orientation is defined using the element x-axis using defined by the GA to GB grid orientation and the v vector is
defined using X1, X2, X3 or G0 entries. Note also that no stress singularity will be introduced here by connecting
many 1D gap elements to the shell or solid mesh. This is because of the multiple 1D element. Had there been just
one 1D element connected to a shell or solid mesh, then certainly there will be stress singularity.
The two basic properties of the CGAP element are its initial gap and its compressive stiffness. If the initial node-
to-node separation becomes more positive, the gap has no stiffness and is for all intents and purposes dormant. As
the separation becomes less positive and approaches zero or some predefined initial gap, the element wakes up and
becomes a stiff spring, which resists further closure. The point at which the gap begins to resist this displacement is
defined by the initial gap. This initial gap may be zero but the length of the element may not. The length of the gaps
may be zero for solid elements by may not for shell elements, whereby the user may decide that due to mid-plane
modelling, these two plates that might rest on each other, would by definition, be separated by half the sum of their
thicknesses. By bridging this separation with gap elements assigned with initial gap of zero, the code will know that
this initial position represents the two parts already in contact.
The orientation is of the CGAP (whether coincident or not) is important to define the direction of opening and
closing as depicted in the figures below. Hence GA and GB must be attached to the correct portions of the model in
order to simulate the correct opening and closing behaviour.
The preload F0 is useful to model friction because the frictional force is a function of the total compressive force
which in turn is a function of the preload. Hence in a SOL 129 analysis, if the only contribution of gravity is to add
275
Second Edition
a normal force which would result in frictional forces, the normal forces induced in the contact elements can be
specified as preloads instead of modelling the gravity load case explicitly.
Gap element stiffness controls the numerical stability. The compressive stiffness must simulate the local stiffness
of the elements in the contact pair. If the stiffness is too high, the element may bounce as the load is incremented
near zero separation. The closed gap stiffness should not exceed the adjacent DOF stiffness by 1000 times. If the
stiffness is too low, external forces may actually drive one node through the other. The CGAP element should be
used when there is very little relative displacement or sliding normal to direction of closure is expected. The
process of choosing a gap stiffness may be an iterative one as an initially soft gap if stiffened to the point where
penetration is minimal but the nonlinear solution still converges. Alternatively, the adaptive gap stiffness
technology adjusts the gap stiffness internally to achieve convergence without penetration within some predefined
tolerance. In the adaptive solution, the method of specifying the initial gap stiffness is the opposite of the manual
iterative process. Choose a stiffer gap and let the code soften it as is required numerically. The adaptive method is
clearly more efficient. Note that the mesh on either contacting surfaces should correspond exactly so that the gap
elements are well aligned. Relative slide should be insignificant as this can cause the gap element to go into tension
when in reality it is still in contact. This problem arises if the force in the gap element acts in the direction of the
element. A better method would then certainly be to define the stiffness of the gap element in a particular DOF
only i.e. normal to the contact interface.
The gap element provides point-to-point contact. When the gap element is open, there is no contact and no friction.
When the gap element is closed, there are three different conditions. The first case is when the gap is sliding (no
friction). The second case occurs when the gap element is sticking (static friction). The third case occurs when the
gap element is slipping (kinetic friction). Sometimes, it may be difficult to converge because of the switching
among these conditions. Typical coefficients of friction are presented.
Material Contact Coefficient of Friction

Steel on steel (dry) 0.3
Steel on steel (greasy) 0.05 to 0.1
Brake lining on cast iron 0.3 to 0.4
Rubber on steel 1.0
Tire on pavement (dry) 0.8 to 0.9
Wood on wood 0.2
On the PGAP Bulk Data entry, U0 and F0 are the initial gap opening and the preload, respectively. U0 is the
separation of the gap element. If you are unsure about what preload to use, use the default value of zero. KA, KB,
and KT are called the penalty values. KA is the axial stiffness when the gap is closed, KB is the axial stiffness
when the gap is open, and the KT is the transverse gap stiffness. All you need to input is the KA value. KB is
defaulted to be zero, and KT is defaulted as a function of KA. The selection of KA or a penalty value is critical to
the convergence of the problem. The non-adaptive gap does not update this KA value. The new adaptive gap
updates this KA value if you specify a positive value for TMAX. The default option for the new adaptive gap is NO
adaptive stiffness update. This is when the TMAX value is equal to 0.0. If TMAX is a negative number, then
MSC.Nastran uses the non-adaptive gap formulation. A good initial KA selection is roughly 1000 times the
Young's modulus of the material that is in the neighborhood of the gap element. Fields 8 and 9 also require some
276
Second Edition
explanation. For the new adaptive value this is MU1, which is the static coefficient of friction, and MU2, which is
the dynamic coefficient of friction. The non-adaptive gap elements use MUY and MUZ in the same fields instead
of MU1 and MU2 values. Therefore, to compare the results using adaptive and non-adaptive gap elements, set both
of these entries to the same values. On most problems, you will not know how to estimate the penetration depth or
field 2 on the continuation entry. Therefore, if you skip the continuation entry, the default new adaptive gap is
obtained, which is everything adaptive except the KA update. The recommended allowable penetration of TMAX
is 10 percent of the thickness for the shell element, and for the solid element it is roughly 1/10,000 of the
characteristic length for the problem. A small positive value will turn on the adaptive stiffness update, which will
then converge at a faster rate. The maximum adjustment ratio or MAR in field 3 of the continuation entry is used
only for the penalty value adjustment of the adaptive gap element. The default value of 100 is sufficient for most
problems.
Further discussion of CGAP parameters is warranted. U0 is self explanatory - the initial open value of the gap. F0 -
any preload you want to apply - be careful if KB is the only thing preventing rigid body motion. KA - this is the
source of most convergence problems due to gap elements. It can be calculated from the local stiffness of the
structure at the GRIDs to which the gap are applied. If you can't do this by hand (usually the case), then run a linear
static (SOL 101) analysis with U0 temporarily set greater than 0.0 (or remove the gap element from the model for
this run, if possible); this is so the gap stiffness you have already defined at KA does not influence the local
stiffness. Then apply a unit load to both GRIDs of the gap in the direction of the gap X axis. Run the analysis and
recover the displacement of both GRIDs in the gap X direction. Now take 1000 times the inverse of the
displacement at the gap GRIDs and use the smallest value of the two for the value of KA. Now 2 questions arise.
First, if the value of displacement in the gap X direction recovered from this run is, say, 3.4211378E-02 then I
calculate KA so KA = 1000 * 1/3.4211378E-02 = 2.923E+04. Do I have to use this EXACT value ? No. The
analysis is only sensitive to orders of magnitude of the value of KA. In the above case, therefore, I would use
KA=3E+4 as the initial KA value. Second, do I have to apply unit loads to EVERY gap GRID in the model (I may
have many, many gaps) ? In general, no. Because I am looking for the order of magnitude of the stiffness for KA, it
is only necessary to select one gap for each region where I judge the stiffness will be significantly different from
other regions. That is to say, if the structure to which the gaps is attached is roughly the same stiffness no matter
which gap GRIDs I select, then one gap will be enough to get a good KA value. Using engineering judgement, I
can see if the structure will have significantly different stiffness in different areas of the model where gaps are
connected. A value of 3E+04 will work just as well as 2E+04 or 4E+04 in the above example. KB - generally I
leave this as default unless I have unusual situations such as a very large value of U0. To illustrate this, take the
example of a gap that has an open value U0=1. I calculate the value of KA to be 2E+16. I leave KB blank, so the
default value becomes KA*1E-14 = 200. Now I apply my loads and eventually during the analysis, the gap closes.
The gap will have moved 1.; gap force = KB*1. = 200. This may be a significant load compared with the applied
load. In this case, I would force KB to 0.1 or smaller to avoid large gap forces due to large axial displacements in
the gap. KT - generally I leave this at default as it is tied to KA via MU1. MU1 and MU2 are self explanatory.
Friction will generally have a significant effect on the cost of the analysis. TMAX, MAR and TRMIN are useful if
the local stiffness of the structure changes significantly as a result of the nonlinear deformations. They allow the
gap stiffness to be adjusted during solution, but only approximate values can be calculated for these. For most
cases, if the structure's stiffness at the gap GRIDs will not change significantly, I would not use adaptive gaps. The
extra iteration of two that maybe needed to get convergence will in general be quicker than reforming the stiffness
to get a not much better value for KA. Only if I expect local stiffness to change significantly would I use TMAX >
0.0. If TMAX is set to 0.0 (the default), the gap-induced stiffness update, gap-induced bisection, and sub-
incremental process are enabled, but the penalty values (KA, KB, KT) remain unchanged. If TMAX is set to a
small positive value, this has all the features of the gap when TMAX=0.0, and also enables the adaptive penalty
capability where the penalty values are adjusted according to changes in the stiffness of the surrounding structure.
A value for TMAX is calculated by examining the structure to which the gaps are attached. If these are shell
elements, then a value of 10% of the thickness of the elements should be used. For other elements, such as beam
elements, then an equivalent thickness is used, such as the depth of the beam in the axial direction of the gap. If the
structure is a massive solid, then the ideal value of TMAX is two or three orders of magnitude less than the elastic
deformation of the solid. This is not always easy to estimate, so a value of 1 * 10E-4 of the characteristic length of
the model can be used. That is, determine the largest dimension of the model and use 10E-4 of that value. If TMAX
277
Second Edition
is too small, the solution will frantically try to adjust the penalty values to update the stiffnesses. If TMAX is too
large; no update will occur and convergence may be elusive. MAR sets the maximum allowable adjustment ratio
for the penalty values and must be in the range 1.0 to 10E6. The upper and lower bounds of the adjusted penalty
values are K/MAR and K*MAR, where K is KA or KT. TRMIN sets the lower bound for the allowable penetration
and is a fraction of TMAX. It must be in the range 0.0 to 1.0. Penalty values are decreased if the penetration is less
than the minimum allowable penetration which is calculated from TRMIN * TMAX. What is allowable ? Back to
good 'ol engineering judgement.
Convergence is often a problem in highly nonlinear problems such as in GAP-like problems. This following
approach is normally a lot faster and more reliable than accepting the default NLPARM entries. The problem with
gap analysis is that the non-linearity is a very severe On/Off situation. This can cause problems where you get
numerical "chatter" when a gap is not open or tightly closed. This chatter makes Nastran think it is not converging
and causes the loads to be bisected. Bisection can be the worst thing to happen, as it reduces the load and can mean
the chatter gets worse. This causes another bisection and before you know it you are applying tiny load increments.
Also, to help whenever a gap opens or closes, we must update the stiffness matrix every iteration. Hence use the
full Newton Raphson. Finally to make the gap closure definite, apply all the load in 1 or 2 steps rather than the
default 10. So in summary use the following settings on NLPARM for a pure gap problem. 1) NINC=1 or 2; 2) Use
Newton Raphson. KMETHOD=ITER, KSTEP=1; 3) Switch off Bisection MAXBIS=0. If convergence is a
problem such as in highly nonlinear problems, then the TSTEP method can always be used with KSTEP=1 such
that stiffness is updated at every time step, hence there is no issue of convergence, just like in explicit nonlinear
transient analysis. However, the time step size must still be small for accuracy.
The CGAP element is not a geometrically nonlinear element, it is a small displacement element, i.e. its
coordinates are not updated as the element deforms. The orientation of the contact plane does not change during
deflection.
The slide line contact elements BLSEG (with BCONP, BFRIC and BWIDTH) are essentially contact curves
that allow significant relative sliding between the contacting parts. Slide lines can also be used to model contact
between surfaces by proper definition of the slide lines. This is done when two or more corresponding slide lines
are positioned on the contacting parts such that they remain relatively coplanar throughout model deformations.
The same stiffness considerations as those for gap elements apply the estimation of the stiffness may be more
complicated than for gap elements. Friction between the sliding interfaces may be incorporated. The friction
coefficient for FEA contact element should not be assumed to have a direct correlation to the friction coefficients
pulled from data sheets. A handy test setup involves a mass on an inclined board supported by a spring.
K U
W sin θ − KU
µ=
W cos θ
W
278
Second Edition
General contact elements are conceptually the simplest but the most computationally intensive. Sets of elements
define the contacting parts. The contact stiffness is usually derived from the material properties of the elements in
the contact pair – typically the Young’s Modulus and in some codes the material damping. The contact and
separation directions are determined from the normals or boundaries of the contacting elements. These contact
entities provide the smoothest and most realistic pressure distribution but the computational price is heavy.
3.4.4.1.7 Material Nonlinearity
Material models can be

elastic or inelastic (the latter exhibiting different unloading path to loading path and hence plastic strain
linear or nonlinear (the latter exhibiting a variable Young’s Modulus with respect to strain)
strain-rate dependent or dependent
temperature dependent or independent
isotropic, orthotropic or anisotropic (defining properties in the three orthogonal directions)
Inelastic, Nonlinear (Limited), Isotropic Material for Beams, Shells and Solids MATS1 (TYPE PLASTIC).
This material model can be used with CBEAM elements (with dedicated plastic hinges at their ends) to perform
plastic collapse analysis of beam frameworks. The elastic-plastic material model requires the definition of the yield
stress. The elastic-plastic material model also requires definition of the yield criteria, i.e. the criteria checked to
initiate yield, namely Tresca, Von Mises, Mohr-Coulomb or Drucker-Prager. The hardening rule must also be
specified, either no hardening (i.e. perfectly plastic), isotropic hardening or kinematic hardening. The isotropic
hardening model does not take the Bauschinger effect into account and hence the compressive yield always equals
the tensile yield. The kinematic hardening model will take into account the Bauschinger effect i.e. the reduction in
the compressive yield once tensile yield has occurred and a stress reversal happens.
Elastic, Nonlinear (General), Isotropic Material for Beams, Shells and Solids MATS1 (TYPE NLELAST).
The nonlinear material model requires the general definition of the stress-strain curve with a TABLES1 entry, i.e.
the multi-linear stress-strain curve. To model a nonlinear elastic cable, a CROD element with the appropriate area
(on a PROD card) can be defined together with a MAT1 and MATS1 card, both sharing the same ID. The MATS1
card references a TABLES1 card which defines the nonlinear stress-strain characteristics of the cable with three
points, for instance (-1.0,0.0), (0.0,0.0) and (1.0,2.05E11) to define a steel tension only cable element.
Hyperelastic Material MATHP. Hyperelastic materials such as rubber, silicone and other elastomer behave
differently than standard engineering materials. Their strain displacement relationship is nonlinear even at small
strains and they are nearly incompressible. The Poisson’s ratio of hyperelastic materials may exceed 0.50, whereas
specifying a Poisson’s ratio of 0.50 or greater will result in failure using any other solution method. If the elements
undergo large net displacements, it is prudent to define hyperelastic elements, otherwise non-equilibrium loading
effects may occur with small strain elements. Because of the corotational formulation where a large deformation is
split into element rigid body deformation and element net deformation, small strain elements can be used to model
large total deformation, but not large net element deformations. A fine mesh will usually ensure that element net
deformations are small. If element net rotations exceed 20 degrees or if the element stretches by more than 10-20%,
then large strain (hyperelastic) elements should be used. Material properties are usually entered as Mooney-Rivlin
constants (consisting of distortional deformation constants and volumetric deformation constants) or as a set of
stress-strain curves (of force versus stretch for simple tension, compression, shear and volumetric compression).
Temperature Dependent Linear Elastic Material MATT1
Temperature Dependent Anisotropic Elastic Material for Shell MATT2 and Solid Elements MATT9
Creep Material CREEP
279
Second Edition
3.4.4.2 Nonlinear Static and Linearized Eigenvalue Buckling Analysis
Buckling (i.e. instability) occurs when the tangent stiffness matrix becomes non-positive definite. To estimate the
buckling load, the following methods can be used.
I. A SOL 106 can be performed until a non-positive definite stiffness matrix is detected. The load steps can be
reduced (by the adaptive bisection method) so the stage at which the tangent stiffness matrix becomes non-
positive definite can be ascertained with greater precision, hence approximating the buckling load.
II. Another method is to use the arc-length method to trace the limit state and the post-buckling path.
III. Another option is to perform linearized buckling analysis at various stages of the equilibrium path based on
the tangent stiffness and differential stiffness at that stage, so-called the linearized buckling analysis based on
a deflected configuration. Note that this is not the true theoretical nonlinear eigenvalue extraction analysis.
However, since the tangent stiffness and the differential stiffness are based on the deflected configuration
from a nonlinear static analysis, we shall refer to this buckling analysis as the nonlinear buckling analysis.
The nonlinear buckling analysis computes a load factor based on the tangent stiffness matrix at not the initial
undeflected configuration, but at a certain deflected position. The eigenvalue extraction method is the usual linear
eigenvalue solution scheme. The nonlinear buckling solution is based on the extrapolation of two consecutive
incremental solutions. The tangent stiffness matrix is proportional to the external loads, which implies that the
critical load may be linearly extrapolated, i.e.
Pcr = Pn + α ∆P
The tangent stiffness matrix is proportional to the displacement increments, hence the critical displacements may be
obtained by extrapolating from the current state, i.e.
Ucr = Un + λ ∆U
Since the tangent stiffness matrix is proportional to the displacement increments i.e. it changes linearly with
displacements, the internal loads are a quadratic function of the displacements.
NASTRAN uses two converged solution points to form the differential stiffness matrix. Hence the buckling
solution tends to be more accurate when these consecutive incremental steps are closer to the buckling point. Since
we do not know where the buckling point is until the analysis is performed, the nonlinear buckling analysis is
performed by dividing the load into a number of subcases and performing the buckling analysis in multiple
subcases based on the tangent stiffness matrix at the current point. Hence, the deck would look exactly the same as
a nonlinear static analysis with
(i) the additional METHOD command in certain subcases referring to the EIGB (with SINV being the
recommended extraction method)
(ii) PARAM, BUCKLE, 2
(iii) KSTEP = 1 in the NLPARM card to force the stiffness matrix to be updated at every solution step

Subcase 1
LOAD = < … >
NLPARM = < … >
METHOD = < ID of EIGB Card in Bulk Data >
Subcase 2
LOAD = < … >
NLPARM = < … >
Subcase 3
LOAD = < … >
NLPARM = < … >
280
Second Edition
$ BULK DATA
PARAM, BUCKLE, 2 $ Buckling Parameter to Activate Nonlinear Buckling Analysis
EIGB ID
To illustrate the nonlinear buckling analysis, if the first subcase has a load totaling 1000 and the second subcase
3000, i.e. an additional 2000. Say, the first subcase refers to a NLPARM entry with 5 increments (i.e. NINC = 5),
hence the incremental load is 200. And say the second subcase refers to a NLPARM entry with 20 increments (i.e.
NINC = 20), hence the incremental load is 2000/20 = 100. Performing a buckling analysis at the end of the first
subcase (by having a METHOD command and PARAM, BUCKLE, 2) solves for α from which the critical
buckling load can be calculated as
Pcr = Pn + α ∆P = 1000 + 200α
Likewise performing a buckling analysis at the end of the second subcase (by having a METHOD command and
PARAM, BUCKLE, 2) solves for another α from which the critical buckling load can be calculated as
Pcr = Pn + α ∆P = 3000 + 100α
Evidently, a better estimate of the buckling load is attained when the equilibrium point from which buckling
analysis is undertaken is close to the buckling point.
3.4.4.3 Nonlinear Static and Linear Eigenvalue Modal Dynamic Analysis
Linear modal analysis is performed on the nonlinear static solutions to include effects of prestress and other
nonlinearities. The linear eigenvalue solution analysis is performed based on the tangent stiffness matrix at the end
of the particular subcase or subcases where the METHOD statement appears. The deck would look exactly the
same as a nonlinear static analysis with
(i) the additional METHOD command in certain subcases referring to the bulk data EIGRL or EIGR
entries to select the linear eigenvalue extraction method
(ii) PARAM, NMLOOP, L with the loopid L of any positive value as this is not a restart
$ BULK DATA
PARAM, NMLOOP, L $ Loopid L can be any positive integer as this is not a restart
281
Second Edition
3.4.4.4 Restart From Nonlinear Static Analysis SOL 106 Into Nonlinear Static Analysis SOL 106
Restarts are allowed from converged solutions. A LOOPID is created after each converged load increment in static
analysis. The restart .dat file should contain all the information from the previous analysis with the addition of the
following cards.
$ FMS
RESTART
$ BULK DATA
PARAM, LOOPID, L $ Specifies Converged Solution L to Start From

PARAM, SUBID, M $ Specifies the Subcase Sequence Number M to Start Into
SUBID is not the subcase ID but the subcase sequence number, which will be the subcase ID if the subcases have
been incremented by 1 from 1. The SUBID value should be incremented by one from the last value printed in .f06.
The LOOPID should be the last value stored for restart as printed in the .f06. On top of the above additional cards,
additional cards which define the restart should be included. The Case Control Section should have the additional
subcases starting with a subcase with the SUBID. The following changes are allowed in the model: -
(i) Additional applied loads, naturally
(ii) Changes to the boundary conditions i.e. SPC may be removed
(iii) Addition of direct input matrices
(iv) Changes to the grid points
(v) Changes to the element, i.e. linear elements may be added or deleted, but should be drastic as to
cause large initial imbalance of loads; also elastic material properties MAT1 may be changed.
3.4.4.5 Restart From Nonlinear Static SOL 106 Into Linear Solution Schemes SOL 107 to SOL 112
It is imperative to realize that linear restarts are incremental values with respect to the preload, not total values.
Hence, the total values are obtained simply by adding the linear restart values to that obtained from the converged
nonlinear static solution. It is advised to have KSTEP = 1 so that the tangent stiffness matrix is computed at every
solution step and to ensure that the linear restarts are based on the very latest tangent stiffness matrix. The deck
should obviously refer to the linear analysis being performed and not SOL 106.
$ FMS
RESTART
$ BULK DATA
PARAM, NMLOOP, L $ Load step id at the end of the subcase from the SOL 106 run
3.4.4.6 Implicit Nonlinear Static (and Dynamic Analysis) SOL 400
As described in Section 4.9.8.5.
3.4.4.7 Implicit Nonlinear Static (and Dynamic Analysis) SOL 600
As described in Section 4.9.8.6.
282
Second Edition
3.5 GNL, MNL Static and Buckling Analysis by Dynamic Relaxation
3.5.1 Dynamic Relaxation of the Explicit Finite Difference Scheme Solving Newton’s Dynamic
Equilibrium ODE (LS-DYNA)


MNL, GL Plastic
U
In dynamic relaxation analysis it is assumed that the loads are acting on the structure suddenly, so the structure is
excited to vibrate around the equilibrium position and eventually come to rest on the equilibrium position. Within
the solution scheme, it is similar to transient analysis except that
(i) artificial viscous damping is applied at each time step
(ii) mass scaling (artificial addition of mass) is employed
Termination occurs when the static solution is reached. If there is no damping applied to the structure, the
oscillation of the structure will go on forever. Therefore, artificial damping is required in the form of reducing the
calculated velocities of all the nodes by a factor at each timestep to allow the vibration to come to rest, and
converge to the static solution.
Convergence is checked by a convergence parameter,

C = current distortional kinetic energy / maximum distortional kinetic energy.
Distortional kinetic energy = total kinetic energy − total mass * (mass averaged velocity)2 / 2.
The distortional kinetic energy is the component of kinetic energy that is deforming or distorting the model. In
theory, the distortional KE should be zero when a static solution is reached. C typically vary between 1E-3 (loose)
and 1E-6 (tight).
Loads and prescribed motions (such as displacements, velocities and accelerations) applied during the dynamic
relaxation should always be ramped up from zero in order to reduce the oscillations. Instantaneously applied loads
will induce over-excitation of higher modes, thus lengthening the time taken to converge and possibly introducing
errors. In reality, the static loads are applied in an infinite time interval so as to not induce any dynamic effects.
Hence, the load should be ramped up slowly (in a duration greater than the fundamental period) so as not to induce
considerable dynamic effects.
If there are non-linear materials in the model, load curves which ramp up suddenly could induce large dynamic
amplifications that could cause the non-linear materials to yield, when in reality they should remain elastic in the
application of static loads. If any part of the model is required to yield (i.e. become non-elastic) as part of the
equilibrium position then great care needs to be taken. This is a path-sensitive solution and the deformation should
progress in a monotonic fashion, otherwise the degree of yielding will be incorrect. If all the material models within
the finite element model are linear elastic, then the static solution (by dynamic relaxation) is path independent. As
with all nonlinear static solutions that are based on solving the dynamic equilibrium equations, the solution is only
valid if it is path independent, which in theory is only applicable to models limited to linear material properties. In a
283
Second Edition
true pseudo-static solution, the loading, deflections and the plastic behaviour increase monotonically. But the
dynamic relaxation solution scheme will probably yield a sufficiently accurate solution so long as the dynamic
oscillations are small at every stage of the analysis such that the variations of displacement (and hence elemental
strain) are small so that excess plasticity is not generated. Dynamic relaxation can thus be used in models with
nonlinear materials, but the time of application of the forcing function should be gradual so that the inertial part of
the dynamic equilibrium equation does not incorrectly cause large displacements to occur and incorrectly cause the
nonlinear materials to yield. If this happens, the material yields due to the dynamic effects of the solution scheme
and not due to the underlying static loading, the latter of which is perfectly acceptable. The matter is further
complicated if the material model have unloading curves as well as the plastic regions. To avoid the undesirable
dynamic effects, there should thus be many time steps between each load increment so that there is plenty of
opportunity for the velocities and hence accelerations to be damped down. Recall that artificial damping is applied
at each time step. The time over which the loads are ramped up should aim to gently accelerate the model
deformation and is dependent on the model. The time should not be so short that the model does not have time to
react, effectively making the loading instantaneous. However, the time should not be too long, which would
increase the time taken to converge. This is because the convergence parameter is based on the initial to the current
kinetic energies. If even the initial kinetic energy in the model is too small (as a result of too gently accelerating the
model) then for a certain convergence ratio, the current kinetic energy will have to be much smaller. A duration
slightly greater than the fundamental period is appropriate.
As we are not interested in the dynamic response (since this is a static solution), the mass matrix can be artificially
formed so as to maximize the time step which is limited by the lowest natural period in the model divided by π.
Hence, mass scaling can be employed if damping is not sufficient to produce a converged static solution quickly.
Mass scaling will also reduce the dynamic effects as the acceleration become smaller.
To perform dynamic relaxation, two steps are undertaken

(i) first, run the dynamic relaxation analysis with as little damping as possible. If c is the damping
constant corresponding to the fundamental frequency, defining
k = 1 − 2ζωndt
let k = 0.9999999; this allows the model to oscillate, enabling its natural frequency to be
determined.
(ii) then, calculate the constant k corresponding an under-damped system
k = 1 − 2ζωndt
ζ = desired fraction of critical damping
ωn = lowest natural frequency of oscillation (rad/s)
dt = timestep
effectively choosing a constant k that will result in the model being under-damped.
Another method of applying the artificial viscous damping is using DAMPING_GLOBAL which applies global
viscous damping proportional to the mass, i.e. damping force = c.v = 2ζmω.v = 2ζm2π/T.v = 4ζπ/T.m.v. The user
specifies 4ζπ/T where T corresponds to the natural frequency of the most prominent mode excited by the
excitation.
Ideally, critical damping will provide the most efficient dynamic relaxation. However, experience has shown that it
is usually better to under-damp the model. An under-damped model will move just past the equilibrium position
and then rebound to converge on the correct solution. This process is relatively easy to monitor and the equilibrium
position becomes obvious. However, a critically damped model will not rebound, since it moves directly to the
equilibrium position, and thus can often look similar to an over-damped model. Experience shows that damping in
the order of about 5% of critical is about optimum and not much higher.
If the equilibrium position is path-sensitive (i.e. certain materials are required to yield), then ideally a critically
damped model should be used. Alternatively, use plenty of time steps within each load increment so that the
dynamic effects are very much reduced.
284
Second Edition
Ensure that all parts of the model have a velocity less than the terminal velocity. If parts of the model need to
displace a relatively large distance before reaching equilibrium, then the model may reach terminal velocity. This is
when the reduction in velocity due to relaxation damping just cancels out the increase in velocity due to loading
(i.e. no resultant acceleration). This causes dynamic relaxation to take a long time because Vterminal limits the speed
of deformation. To overcome this, ramp up the loading to greater than the real loading (2-3 times gravity) to
deform faster, thus increasing Vterminal, then as equilibrium position reached, ramp load back down, ensuring no
additional modes of deformation occurs that would not have occurred under normal magnitude loading.
Vterminal = F * dt * k / (m*(1-k))
F = desired fraction of critical (normally 1.0)
dt = timestep
m = mass of body
k = damping constant
The effectiveness of the dynamic relaxation solution scheme is investigated by plotting the variation of the
convergence parameter as shown below.
Time
Convergence Parameter C
(a)
(c)
(b)
(d)
The most common problem with dynamic relaxations is that the solution fails to converge or appears to take too
long to converge. Referring to the plot above, we can identify 4 cases
(a) Solutions that never start to converge or take too long to converge. This can be caused by severe
over-damping or by an insufficiently resisted (but loaded) mode of deformation. Apply a lower
damping constant during the dynamic relaxation phase
(b) Solutions that partly converge but never reach the convergence tolerance. This can be caused by
hourglassing or high modes of oscillation such as single element modes. To solve these problems,
try using a different hourglass control or significantly reduce the timestep by say a factor of 5 for
the dynamic relaxation phase
(c) Severe under-damping
(d) The correct solution
285
Second Edition
3.5.2 LS-DYNA (GNL, MNL Explicit Transient) Dynamic Relaxation Cards
To specify termination time of zero for the explicit dynamic analysis to have no limit
*CONTROL_TERMINATION
Termination
Termination
Termination Change in
Termination Termination Min Time
Energy Ratio Total Mass
Time Limit Cycle Limit Step Size
Limit From Mass
Limit
Scaling
To set structural timestep size control and invoke mass scaling if necessary
*CONTROL_TIMESTEP
Min Time
Maximum
Initial Time Factor For Shell Min Step For Erosion Limit Mass
Basis Time Step
Step Time Step Time Step Mass Flag Scaling
Curve
Scaling
To define controls for dynamic relaxation

*CONTROL_DYNAMIC_RELAXATION
To specify user-defined boundary conditions for the dynamic relaxation (stress initialization) phase,
*LOAD_NODE_<POINT, SET> (HM: forces, moments)

*SET_NODE
*DEFINE_CURVE with SIDR = 1 for stress initialization phase
*LOAD_BEAM_<ELEMENT, SET>
*SET_BEAM
*LOAD_SHELL_<ELEMENT, SET> (HM: pressure ShellPres)

*SET_SHELL
*LOAD_RIGID_BODY
*LOAD_SEGMENT_<SET> (HM: pressure SegmentPre)

*SET_SEGMENT
To apply automatically computed gravitational loads, noting that by d-Alembert’s principle, applying accelerations
in a certain direction results in inertial loads acting in the opposite direction,
*LOAD_BODY_Z with sf = 9.81 ms-2

286
Second Edition
To prescribe displacements boundary conditions on a node, on a set of nodes, on a rigid body in the global axes
system or on a rigid body in the rigid body local axes system,
*BOUNDARY_PRESCRIBED_MOTION_<NODE, SET, RIGID, RIGID_LOCAL>

Load Curve
NID, NSID, Displacement
DOF LCID Scale Factor VID DEATH BIRTH
or PART ID VAD
SF
The vector ID, VID is used to specify a direction vector if imposed motion not in global axes system.
*SET_NODE_LIST
NSID DA1 DA2 DA3 DA4
NID NID NID NID NID NID NID NID
NID NID NID NID … … … …
*DEFINE_CURVE
LCID SIDR SFA SFO OFFA OFFO DATTYP
Abscissa Values Ordinate Values
… …
SIDR defines whether the curve is valid for the transient phase, stress initialization phase or both. Here obviously,
SIDR = 1. The curve should define a constant value of displacement valid throughout the analysis. If the dynamic
relaxation phase is to be followed by a transient seismic analysis, it is necessary to define zero velocity prescribed
boundary conditions for the dynamic relaxation phase on the nodes at which the transient accelerations are applied
so that the structure is supported during dynamic relaxation.
*DEFINE_VECTOR if DOF not global

VID XTail YTail ZTail Xhead Yhead ZHead
287
Second Edition
4 METHODS OF DYNAMIC ANALYSES

4.1 GL, ML Implicit Real Modal (Eigenvalue) Analysis
The natural frequencies of a structure are the frequencies at which the structure naturally tends to vibrate if
subjected to a disturbance. Hence modal analysis warns if the dominant forcing frequencies are close to the lowest
natural frequencies of the structure, indicating resonance behavior of the lowest modes of the structure.
The equation of motion for a free, undamped system is

[M ]{&u&( t )} + [K ]{u ( t )} = {0}
We seek solutions of the form
[
{u(t)}i = Re al {φ}i ξ i e λ i t ] for the i th
mode of vibration
where ξ i = ξ Ri + iξ Ii and λ i = α i + iω di .
Note that α represents the decaying part and ω d the damped natural frequency.
Hence, substituti ng into the equation of motion
[M ]ξ i λ2i {φ}i e λ i t + [C]ξ i λ i {φ}i e λ i t + [K ]ξ i {φ}i e λ i t = {0}
[λ [M] + λ [C] + [K]]{φ}
2
i i i = {0}
Since there is no damping
α i = 0 and ω di = ω ni and so λ i = iω ni
Thus
[− ω ]
ni [ M ] + [ K ] {φ}i
2
= {0}
This is a real eigenvalue problem to be solved for ω ni and {φ}i .
For each mode i, NASTRAN outputs the modal frequency ω ni and the mode shape {φ}i .
For completion, the response due to mode i, {u(t)}i of a free undamped linear elastic structure subjected to
an initial impact (defining an initial displacement and velocity) is
[
{u(t)}i = {φ}i Re al ξ1i e λ1i t + ξ 2i e λ 2 i t ]
{u(t)}i = {φ}i Re al [(ξ1Ri + iξ1Ii )(cos ω ni t + i sin ω ni t ) + (ξ 2 Ri + iξ 2 Ii )(cos ω ni t − i sin ω ni t )]
{u(t)}i = {φ}i Re al [((ξ1Ri + ξ 2 R ) cos ω ni t − (ξ1Ii − ξ 2 Ii ) sin ω ni t ) + i((ξ1Ii + ξ 2 Ii ) cos ω ni t + (ξ1Ri − ξ 2 Ri ) sin ω ni t )]
For the free vibration response to be real for all t,
ξ1Ii = −ξ 2 Ii and ξ1Ri = ξ 2 Ri
Since there are two less independent constants, let
ξ1Ii = −ξ 2 Ii = ξ Ii and ξ1Ri = ξ 2 Ri = ξ Ri
We notice that ξ1i and ξ 2i are a complex conjugate pair
ξ1i = ξ Ri + iξ Ii and ξ 2i = ξ Ri − iξ Ii
Hence
{u(t)}i = {φ}i (2ξ Ri cos ω ni t − 2ξ Ii sin ω ni t )
Thus the total response due to the superposition of all modes
{u(t)} = [Φ ]{(2ξ Ri cos ω ni t − 2ξ Ii sin ω ni t )}
288
Second Edition
Re writing the eigenvalue problem [[K ] − ωni [ M]]{φ}i = {0} as

2
[K ]{φ}i = ωni [M ]{φ}i

2
and premultiplying by{φi }

T
{φi }T [K ]{φ}i = ωni 2 {φi }T [M]{φ}i

K i = ωni 2Mi
hence, the i th generalized mass
Mi = {φi } [M ]{φi }
T
and the i th generalized stiffness

K i = {φi } [K ]{φi }
T
Note that the value of the generalized (or modal) mass and generalized (or modal) stiffness is arbitrary since it is
dependent upon how the corresponding eigenvector has been normalized. However, for a particular mode,
K i = ω ni Mi
2
Also, the Rayleigh’s quotient is obtained as

K {φ }T [K ]{φi }
ω 2ni = i = i T
Mi {φ i } [M ]{φi }
Because the normal modes are independent of each other, the orthogonality condition holds.
{φi }T [M]{φ j } = 0
& {φi }T [K ]{φ j } = 0 if i ≠ j
Hence, we can obtain the diagonal modal mass and the diagonal modal stiffness matrices.
modal mass matrix, [M] = [Φ ] [M ][Φ ]

T
[ ]
modal stiffness matrix, [K] = [Φ ] [K ][Φ ] = ω 2 [M]
T
Again, the following relationship holds,

[K] = [ω2 ][M]
A normal modal analysis indicates the best location for the accelerometers in dynamic testing. Design changes can
be evaluated with a normal modal analysis, in that if a particular modification were to cause a change in the
frequencies and mode shapes, then the response in also likely to change. This is done with the knowledge that the
natural frequencies are a function of the structural properties and boundary conditions but the mode shapes are a
function of only the boundary conditions. Modal strain energy is a useful quantity in identifying candidate elements
for design changes to eliminate problematic low frequencies. Elements with large values of strain energy in a mode
indicate the location of large elastic deformation (energy). Stiffening these elements will increase the natural
frequency more than stiffening other elements.
It must be understood that the scaling (or normalization) of the normal modes are arbitrary, hence their do not
indicate the response. This means that a different scaling method will yield a different modal (or generalized) mass,
modal stiffness (but same modal frequency) and different modal response. However the response due to the
particular mode in the physical coordinates will be unique irrespective of the method of scaling.
Even the comparison of magnitude of response between the different mode shapes or different modal masses in
itself to determine relative importance of each mode is incomplete (as the amplitude and location of the excitation
i.e. the modal mass is also important), although the response on different parts of the structure due to a particular
289
Second Edition
mode can be indicative of the more stressed parts due to that particular mode. But it remains that the mode shapes
only represent the shapes of vibration that the structure vibrates in, and not the magnitude, which is dependent upon
the amplitude and location of loading and the relation between the forcing frequencies and the natural frequencies.
Three methods of eigenvector scaling exists, namely

(i) MASS normalization
Ensures {φi}T[M]{φi} = 1.0. Saves computational effort and storage. However, for very heavy structures,
[M] becomes large, and so {φi} can be very small. The magnitudes of the mode shapes of different modes
cannot be compared to determine relative importance. The modal stiffness will be the square of the natural
modal frequency because Ki = ωni2 Mi = ωni2(1) = ωni2.
(ii) MAX normalization
Scales the eigenvectors such that the maximum component is unity for each and every mode. Modal
masses of the same order in themselves cannot be used to determine relative participation of individual
modes (as the amplitude of the modal force is also of significance), however a small modal mass obtained
from this normalization clearly indicates a local mode or an isolated mechanism.
(iii) POINT normalization
This allows the user to choose a specific displacement component at which the modal displacements are set
to 1 or –1. Useful if user knows the maximum displacement location and component. However, this
normalization is not always recommended because for complex structures, the chosen component may
have very small values of displacement for higher modes causing larger numbers to be normalized by a
small number, resulting in possible numerical roundoff errors and ridiculously higher modal masses. For
instance, if the POINT normalization points to a DOF component which does not really exist in a particular
mode, than all the other eigenvector terms will be normalized by a very small number, which will certainly
result in numerical errors. In this method, the modal masses can be compared between modes if the DOF
chosen for POINT normalization corresponds to the solitary point of load excitation, i.e. ensuring that the
(amplitude of the) modal force is the same between different modes. In this case, the higher the modal
mass, the lower will be the response.
The orthogonality of normal modes signifies that no mode can be obtained from a linear combination of other
modes. The representation of a normal mode by using a modal mass and modal stiffness is useful for formulating
equivalent dynamic models and in component mode synthesis.
Rayleigh’s quotient as presented above is analogous to the equation of natural circular frequency ωn2 = K/M for a
SDOF system, here instead the natural circular frequency of the mode is the division of the modal stiffness to the
modal mass, square rooted.
Identical eigenvalues (repeated roots) occur in structures that have a plane of symmetry or that have multiple
identical pieces (such as appendages). The eigenvectors (mode shapes) for these repeated roots are not unique
because many sets of eigenvectors can be found that are normal to each other. Consequently, small changes in
model or different computers can make large changes in the eigenvectors for the repeated roots. Rigid body modes
are a special case of repeated roots.
The modal dynamic analysis is based on only the instantaneous stiffness matrix at the initial undeflected stage. The
modal dynamic P-∆ (KGA From KTA) analysis is based on the instantaneous and geometric (or differential) stiffness
matrices at the initial undeflected stage i.e. taking in to account the effect of the initial prestress and initial non-
work conjugate external load on the stiffness of the structure in the computation of the structural frequencies and
mode shapes.
Modal Dynamic [[ K AE ] − ω ni [ M ]]{φ}i = {0}
2
Modal Dynamic P - Delta [[ K TA ] − ω ni 2 [ M ]]{φ}i = {0}
It is worth noting that only the stiffness and the mass distribution of the structure determine its modes. The static
equilibrium displacement does not come into the equations. However, if geometrical non-linearity is taken into
290
Second Edition
account, the tangent stiffness of the structure will change from the initial undeflected configuration to its static
equilibrium configuration, in which case the real modal analysis will be affected.
It is important to check for rigid body motion. The rigid body modes involve translation or rotation of the model,
without any deformation i.e. stress free conditions indicating modelling errors is an inadequate constraint set or the
analysis of unconstrained structures such as airplanes. Rigid body modes have a zero frequency. In practice, due to
roundoff errors the frequency of these modes is a small number. The modes do not occur in such a pure form and
are often coupled together in some way but there should always be 6 rigid-body modes and their natural
frequencies should be close to 0.0 Hz (~1.0E-4) as their modal mass is greater than zero whilst their generalized
stiffness is zero. The user should check that this number is several orders of magnitude lower than the lowest
natural frequency. A zero frequency mode which does not also have zero strain energies is not a rigid body mode,
instead could be a mechanism and as such should be investigated. The number of rigid body modes depends on the
way the structure is supported. For example, an unsupported vehicle model would produce 6 rigid body modes (3
translations, 3 rotations), a model of half the vehicle with symmetry boundary conditions should produce 3 rigid
body modes. A cantilever beam should have no rigid body modes. A common modelling error resulting in a
mechanism is when a bar is cantilevered from a solid element; the bar has rotational stiffness and the solid has no
rotational stiffness, resulting in a pinned connection when the two are joined. The user should check the natural
frequency is of the right order of magnitude. For example, the lowest bending and torsion modes in a standard
saloon vehicle are 20-30 Hz, while the lowest modes in multi-story buildings are 2-5 Hz. The natural modes should
be animated, and the overall behavior should be assessed. It is important to distinguish between fundamental modes
involving the whole structure, and local modes involving limited zones. The local modes can often be due to
modelling problems (for example flapping panels in vehicle structures), and a judgment should be made whether
they are unrealistic.
Modal analysis is extremely useful to check for unrestrained degrees-of-freedom. Note that in this case the analysis
will often run but spurious mode shapes will often result involving a component that has not been properly attached
to the main structure. It is often true that merely by post-processing the results from a modal analysis and studying
the mode shapes most of the problems concerning the connectivity of the FE model become apparent.
Alternatively, the edges of the finite element mesh can also be highlighted with a preprocessor and this could
provide useful insight.
A matrix whose eigenvalues are all greater than zero is said to be positive definite. If the eigenvalues are zero and
positive, the matrix is positive semi-definite. An unconstrained structure would have a positive semi-definite
matrix. If all the rigid-body modes are constrained, the stiffness matrix will then be positive definite.
An extremely reliable mathematical tool that determines the number of eigenvalues that exists within a certain
frequency range is the Sturm Sequence Check. This is printed under UIM 5010 and should be inspected always.
Modal testing and analysis correlation is done using orthogonality checking and Modal Assurance Criteria (MAC)
using the postmaca.v2001 DMAP alter. It allows for the quick assessment of modal vectors obtained from test data.
The orthogonality check indicates if a set of vectors is orthogonal to the mass matrix, and hence shows if the large
mass terms have reasonable agreement between test and analysis. The MAC indicates a set of vectors is linearly
independent, and hence indicates how well the modal vectors from the test and analysis agree with each other. As a
general rule for the two checks, the diagonal terms should be greater than 0.9 (with lower order modes very close to
unity) and off-diagonal terms should be less than 0.1. Note that both the analysis DOFs and test accelerometers
should be in the same location and orientation.
Orthogonal ity Check [Φ ]Tt [M ][Φ ]a = [I ]

((φ ) (φ ) )
T
t i a j
2
Modal Assurance Criteria, MAC ij

(φ φ ) (φ φ )
T
t t i
T
a a j
291
Second Edition
4.1.2.1 GL, ML Real Modal Analysis
SOL 103
$ Sets defining grid ids or element ids
SET < Number > = 1 THRU 100, 211, 343, < etc >
$ Grid output of displacement for each mode i.e. eigenvector
$ SORT1 lists the results by eigenvalue whilst SORT2 lists the results by grid id
DISPLACEMENT(<SORT1/SORT2>,<PRINT,PUNCH,PLOT>) = ALL/<Grid Set ID>
$ Grid output of real eigenvector for the a-set
SVECTOR(<PRINT,PUNCH>) = ALL/<Grid Set ID>
$ Grid output of SPC forces
SPCFORCES(<SORT1/SORT2>,<PRINT,PUNCH,PLOT>) = ALL/<Grid Set ID>
$ Element output of force, stress and strain
ELFORCE(<SORT1/SORT2>,<PRINT,PUNCH,PLOT>) = ALL/<Element Set ID>
ELSTRESS(<SORT1/SORT2>,<PRINT,PUNCH,PLOT>) = ALL/<Element Set ID>
STRAIN(<SORT1/SORT2>,<PRINT,PUNCH,PLOT>) = ALL/<Element Set ID>
$ Analysis Cards
SPC = < ID of SPC Cards Defined in Bulk Data >
METHOD = < ID IN EIGRL or EIGR >
$ XY plot output
OUTPUT(XYPLOT)
XYPUNCH <DISP/VELO/ACCE> RESPONSE <subcase>/<Grid ID>(<T1/T2/T3>)
XYPUNCH <ELFORCE/ELSTRESS/STRAIN> RESPONSE <subcase>/<Element ID>(<Code Number>)
The recommended method of eigenvalue extraction is the Lanczos method, which combines the best
characteristics of both the transformation (Givens, Householder, Modified Givens, Modified Householder) methods
and iterative tracking (Inverse Power, Strum Modified Inverse Power) methods. The Lanczos method requires that
the mass matrix be positive semi-definite and the stiffness be symmetric but does not miss modes. The Lanczos
method is defined with an EIGRL entry which allows either MASS (default) or MAX eigenvector normalization.
$ BULK DATA
Lower Upper Eigenvector
Number of
EIGRL ID Frequency Frequency MSGLVL MAXSET SHFSCL Normalization
Eigenvalues
(Hz) (Hz) Method
A backup method that does not miss roots and is useful for finding out the first few modes for very large models
that do not fit in memory is the Sturm Modified Inverse Power Method (SINV), which allows either MASS
(default), MAX or POINT eigenvector normalization.
$ BULK DATA
Lower Upper
Number of
EIGR ID SINV Frequency Frequency
Eigenvalues
(Hz) (Hz)
Eigenvector Grid ID
DOF for
Normalization for
POINT
Method POINT
292
Second Edition
4.1.2.2 GL, ML P-∆ (KGA From KEA) Real Modal Analysis
It is often necessary to incorporate the reduction in bending stiffness of gravity load resisting columns for the
analysis of lateral loads. The following procedure is undertaken.
Phase 1
matrix [KGA]1 (and output into a .pch file) based on the generated element loads from the [KEA] static analysis.
Phase 2
A SOL 103 is undertaken based on [KEA] + [KGA]1 with the k2gg=ktjj statement in the Case Control Section and the
outputted .pch file which contains the ktjj matrix in the Bulk Data. The responses at this stage represent the P-∆
(KGA From KEA) real modal response.
The following equivalent alternative procedure can also be employed.

SUBCASE 1
SUBCASE 2
LABEL = P-∆ Modal Analysis
293
Second Edition
RPM is over 1000. For moderately geometric nonlinear analysis, exclusion of follower stiffness affects the rate of
convergence, but the converged solution is correct. For severely geometric nonlinear analysis, it may not be
294
Second Edition
4.1.2.3 GL, ML P-∆ (KGA From Exact or Approximate KTA) Real Modal Analysis
It is often necessary to include the differential stiffness, especially if there are prestressed cables in the model and
the mode shapes are sought.
Modal Dynamic P - ∆ [[ K TA ] − ω ni [M ]]{φ}i = {0}
2
Phase 1
Phase 2
Phase 3
Phase 4
A SOL 103 is undertaken with the k2gg=ktjj statement in the Case Control Section and the outputted .pch file
which contains the latest ktjj matrix in the Bulk Data. The responses at this stage represent the P-∆ (KGA From
Approximate KTA) real modal response.
295
Second Edition
4.1.3.1 Natural Frequency and Free Vibration Response of SDOF Systems
Equation of motion
m&u&( t ) + ku ( t ) = 0
Assume general solution
u(t) = Ge λt where G = G R + iG I and λ = α + iωd
Hence
mGλ2 e λt + kGe λt = 0
(mλ 2
)
+ k Ge λ t = 0
for LHS to be zero for all t
(mλ )
+ k = 0 as
2
Ge λt > 0
the roots of this quadratic characteristic equation are
k k
λ1 = +i λ 2 = −i
m m
k
∴α = 0 and ωd = ω n = rad / s
m
note that the relationships,
ωn 2π
natural frequency, f n = Hertz and the period, Tn = s
2π ωn
hence, the complementary function,
u(t) = G1e λ1t + G 2 e λ 2 t
u(t) = (G1R + iG1I )(cos ωn t + i sin ωn t ) + (G 2 R + iG 2I )(cos ωn t − i sin ωn t )
u ( t ) = [((G1R + G 2 R )cos ωn t − (G1I − G 2 I )sin ωn t ) + i((G1I + G 2 I ) cos ωn t + (G1R − G 2 R )sin ωn t )]
the free vibration response must be real for all t, hence
G1I = −G 2 I and G1R = G 2 R
sin ce there are two less independent constants, let
G1I = −G 2 I = G I and G1R = G 2 R = G R
we notice that G1 and G 2 are a complex conjugate pair
G1 = G R + iG I and G 2 = G R − iG I
hence the general solution
u ( t ) = 2G R cos ωn t − 2G I sin ωn t
Substituti ng the integration constants with the initial conditions,
u&(0)
u ( t ) = u (0) cos ωn t + sin ωn t
ωn
Hence the maximum dynamic displacement
2
 u&(0) 
u max =   + u (0) 2
ω
 n 
296
Second Edition
A free vibrational dynamic response analysis involves initial displacement and velocity conditions but no forcing
vector. It is important to realize that the vibration occurs about the static equilibrium position. Hence we always
define u(t) to begin from the static equilibrium position. However, the dynamic analysis need not begin at this
point. For example, in the instance of a mass m on a string of tensile stiffness k dropped from a level where the
string is not taut, the dynamic analysis begins (t = 0.0) when the string just becomes taut and hence u(t = 0.0) =
−mg/k and du/dt (t = 0.0) will be the velocity of the mass when it reaches that particular taut string elevation.
Likewise, when a mass m is dropped h meters onto the tip of a cantilever, u(t = 0.0) = −mgL3/(3EI) and du/dt (t =
0.0) = (2gh)1/2. The static displacement was found simply from the force mg divided by the stiffness 3EI/L3.
From the knowledge of the initial conditions, we can determine the maximum dynamic displacement by solving the
free vibrational dynamic equation of motion. In summary, to determine the maximum dynamic displacement,
(i) first identify the u(t) = 0 reference as the position of static equilibrium;
(ii) second, identify the t = 0 level as when dynamic analysis begins, i.e. when a dynamic equation of
motion can be written down
(iii) evaluate the initial conditions u(t = 0.0) and du/dt (t = 0.0)
(iv) evaluate the natural circular frequency of the system
(iv) the maximum dynamic displacement can be ascertained from the formula
To estimate the undamped natural circular frequency, we employ ωn=(k/m)0.5. The single mass m is readily
obtainable for SDOF systems. The elastic stiffness in the direction of the dynamic freedom k is obtained from
either of the following methods.
4.1.3.1.1 Natural Frequency Using the Unit Load Method (Virtual Work)
P ∆ = f δ expresses virtual work i.e. external work = internal work

P’∆ = f ’δ expresses the load method where
P’ = virtual external action, specified usually as unity for the unit load method
∆ = real external kinematic, the item to be found
f ’ = virtual internal action, due to the virtual external actions P’
δ = real internal kinematic, due to the real external actions on the structure
1’∆ = f1’δ expresses the unit load method
1’∆1 = f1’δ1 represents the unit load method with the real external actions also unity i.e. both the virtual external
actions and real external actions are unity
= f1 ' δ 1
M   P  P L  T  V Q 
= ∫ (M 1 )V  1 ds  + ∫ (P1 )V  1 ds  or (P1 )V  1  + ∫ (T1 )V  1 ds  + ∫ (V1 )V  1 ds 
 EI R  EA R  EA R  GK t R  GIb  R
   
 P1spring  M   T1spring 
+ (P )
V
 + (M 1spring )  1spring ( )
 + T1spring V  
1spring  V
 k spring R  k spring
rotational   k spring
torsional 
 R  R
= ∫ M1 ds + ∫ P1 1 ds or P1 1 + ∫ T1 1 ds + ∫ V1 1 ds + P1sp + M 1sp + T1sp
EI EA EA GK t GIb k sp k rot sp k tor sp
1
k=
∆1
To estimate the undamped natural circular frequency, we employ ωn=(k/m)0.5.
If αs > 0 and given BMD for non-unity external action, say for a load of 700. 1’∆ = f1’δ expresses the unit load
method. δ700 is given, and to find f1, simply randomly release any indeterminacy to draw the virtual internal action
297
Second Edition
diagram f1 removing the real external load 700 and applying the virtual external unit load. Then, ∆700 = f1’δ700 and
finally, k = 700 / ∆700. To estimate the undamped natural circular frequency, we employ ωn=(k/m)0.5.
4.1.3.1.2 Natural Frequency Using Stiffness Formulae
It is worth noting that the equivalent stiffness of springs in parallel is the addition of the individual stiffnesses and
the equivalent stiffness of springs in series is the inverse of the addition of the inverse of the individual stiffnesses.
Stiffness in series occurs when the load path has to travel both stiffnesses sequentially. Stiffness in parallel occurs
when the load path is given the option to be more attracted to the stiffer element. In series, there is no question of
whether the load will travel the path or not, for it must, all loads must travel some path, and in series, there is no
other option. A mass on the bottom of a vertically hanging spring at the free end of a bending beam cantilever can
be idealized as a SDOF system with equivalent springs in series.
1 1 L3
= +
k e k spring 3EI
Single story shear frames can be idealized as SDOF systems with the stiffness from the bending beam columns
equivalent to a system of springs in parallel because of the axial rigidity of the horizontal member of the shear
frame. By definition, there is full moment rigidity between the top of the columns and the rigid horizontal member.
Standard fixed ended bending beam lateral stiffness used for shear frames with fixed bases is k = number of
columns x 12EI/L3. Standard cantilever bending beam lateral stiffness used for shear frames with pinned bases, k =
number of columns x 3EI/L3. An example of a shear frame includes water tank towers.
To estimate the undamped natural circular frequency, we employ ωn=(k/m)0.5.
4.1.3.1.3 Natural Frequency Using the Static Deflection (used when EI not readily available)
The natural frequency can be estimated from

1 k
fn =
2π m
Replacing the mass term with weight, W, we have
g k g k g 1
fn = = = = 15.76 u st in mm
2π mg 2π W 2π u st u st
Which now relates the natural frequency to the static deflection ust of a single lumped mass dynamic DOF. This
formula is exact for single lumped mass systems.
298
Second Edition
4.1.3.2 Natural Frequencies of MDOF Systems
Either the stiffness or flexibility formulation to the equation of motion can be employed. The solution can be
performed by either the exact classical determinant method, the approximate Stodola iterative method, the
approximate Rayleigh Quotient method or the approximate Rayleigh-Ritz method.
4.1.3.2.1 Stiffness Formulation
Shear frames analysis assumes that the mass of the structure is concentrated at the floors, that the axial force in the
columns are too small to consider axial deformation, and that the floor girders are infinitely stiff compared to the
columns such that there is no rotation at the connection between the floor and the columns. The third assumption
means that the stiffness (or flexibility) of the structure is only provided by the columns.
The free, undamped vibration of the shear frame is described by the equation of motion
[M] {ü(t)} + [K] {u(t)} = {0}
The [K] matrix can be the instantaneous stiffness matrix [KEA] or the tangent stiffness matrix [KTA], the A denoting
at its initial undeflected configuration. In the instantaneous stiffness matrix, the stiffness coefficient kij is the force
required at the ith coordinate to maintain a unit displacement at the jth coordinate while all other coordinates remain
stationary. Formulate [KEA] column-by-column (each column corresponding to a unit displacement at the jth
coordinate) noting the forces required in all the i coordinates. Ensure [KEA] is symmetric.
M1
u1
h1 EI1
M2 u2 M1 0 0 
[M ] =  0 M2 0 
h2 EI2  0
M3 0 M 3 
u3
h3 EI3
A unit displacement of u1 would induce a force of 2x12EI1/h13 at DOF 1 and a force of -2x12EI1/h13 at DOF 2 for
all other DOFs to remain stationary. A unit displacement of u2 would induce a force of 2x12EI1/h13+2x12EI2/h23 at
DOF 2, a force of -2x12EI1/h13 at DOF 1 and a force of -2x12EI2/h23 at DOF 3 for all other DOFs to remain
stationary. A unit displacement of u3 would induce a force of 2x12EI3/h33 at DOF 3 and a force of -2x12EI2/h23 at
DOF 2 for all other DOFs to remain stationary. Hence, the instantaneous stiffness matrix,
 24EI1 24EI1 
 3
− 0 
 h1 h 13 
 24EI1 24EI1 24EI 2 24EI 2 
[K AE ] =  − + − 
 h 13 h 13 h 32 h23

 0 24EI 2 24EI 2 24EI 3 
 − +
 h 32 h 32 h 33 
Note that the stiffness contributions from the columns at the same level are added because the stiffnesses are in
parallel to each other. Also, had a base been pinned, then the lateral stiffness contribution would just be 3EI/h3
instead of 12EI/h3.
299
Second Edition
It may also be prudent to include the reduction in stiffness from the P-∆ effect, i.e. a linearized geometric stiffness
matrix. A unit displacement of u1 would induce a secondary moment of M1g in the topmost columns (note all the
topmost columns and not just one of them) for all other DOFs to remain stationary. This can be represented by a
force M1g/h1 at DOF 1 and a force -M1g/h1 at DOF 2. Likewise, a unit displacement of u2 would induce a secondary
moment of M1g in the topmost columns and a secondary moment of (M1+M2)g in the intermediate columns. This
can be represented by a force -M1g/h1 at DOF 1, a force M1g/h1+(M1+M2)g/h2 at DOF 2 and a force -(M1+M2)g/h2
at DOF 3. Finally, a unit displacement of u3 would induce a secondary moment of (M1+M2)g in the intermediate
columns and a secondary moment of (M1+M2+M3)g in the lowermost columns. This can be represented by a force -
(M1+M2)g/h2 at DOF 2 and a force (M1+M2)g/h2+(M1+M2+M3)g/h3 at DOF 3. Hence, the geometric stiffness
matrix,
 M 1g M 1g 
 − 0 
 h1 h1 
M1g (M1 + M 2 )g (M1 + M 2 )g
] =  − 1 
Mg
A
[K Gn + − 
h1 h1 h2 h2

 0 −
(M1 + M 2 )g (M1 + M 2 )g + (M1 + M 2 + M 3 )g 
 h2 h2 h3 
It is important to point out that the instantaneous stiffness matrix represents the forces required to produce and
maintain the unit displacements in the pertinent DOFs. The geometric stiffness matrix on the other hand represents
the forces which are generated due to the unit displacements in the pertinent DOFs. Hence the equation of motion is
[M] {ü(t)} + [KEA] {u(t)} = [KGnA] {u}

[M] {ü(t)} + [[KEA]−[KGnA]] {u(t)} = {0}
[M] {ü(t)} + [KT] {u(t)} = {0}
Letting {u}i = {φ}i Gieλit leads to the real eigenvalue problem
[[K] − ωni2 [M]]{φ}i = 0
The total solution of the free vibrational problem is given by the linear superposition of the individual modes of
vibration.
 A1 sin(ω1 t − α1 ) 
 Μ 
 
{u} = [{φ}1... {φ}i ... {φ}n ] A i sin(ωi t − α i ) 
 Μ 
 
A n sin(ω n t − α n ) 
The constants Ai and αi are the constants of integration to be determined from the initial displacement and velocity
conditions.
Note that the flexibility matrix [F] of the frame can be obtained from a linear static analysis program by
successively applying unit loads at each storey and on each occasion measuring the total displacement at all the
storey levels. The matrix [F] is then inversed to obtain the stiffness matrix [K].
300
Second Edition
4.1.3.2.2 Flexibility Formulation
Stiffness formulation,
[[K ] − ω 2ni [ M ]]{φ}i = {0}
1
Multiply by [F] or by − [ F],
ω 2ni
1
[[F][K ] − ω 2ni [ F][M ]]{φ}i = {0} or [[F][ M ] − [ F][K ]]{φ}i = {0}
ω 2ni
1
[[I] − ω 2ni [ F][M ]]{φ}i = {0} or [[F][ M ] − [ I]]{φ}i = {0} ( Flexibility formulations)
ω 2ni
These are eigenvalue problems.
Flexibility coefficient fij is the displacement produced at the ith coordinate due to a unit force applied at the jth
coordinate only. Formulate [F] column-by-column (each column corresponding to a unit force at the jth coordinate)
noting the displacements induced in all the i coordinates. In formulating these columns in [F], 3 cases are
identified: -
(a) Unit force above the displacement of the DOF sought Displacement of the DOF is the flexibility of
all that including and below the displacement DOF
(b) Unit force inline with the displacement of the DOF sought Displacement of the DOF is the
flexibility of all that including and below the displacement DOF
(c) Unit force below the displacement of the DOF sought Displacement of the DOF is the flexibility of
all that including and below the unit force
In short, the displacement at the particular DOF sought after is the cumulative flexibility (inverse of stiffness) of all
the shear frame levels including and below the displacement DOF or the unit force, whichever is lower. Ensure F is
symmetric.
M
u1 u1 1 9
3 3 =
3m EI 12EI/3 12EI/3 12EI / 3 + 12EI / 3
3 3
8EI
M u2 u2
1 9
12EI/33 12EI/33 =
3m EI 12EI / 3 + 12EI / 3
3 3
8EI
M u3 u3
1 9
3m 2EI 12(2EI)/33 12(2EI)/33 =
12(2EI) / 3 3 + 12(2EI) / 3 3 16EI
Transverse stiffness Displacement contribution of

of columns floor level due to unit load at
the particular level
 9 9 9 9 9 9  M 0 0 
 8EI + 8EI + 16EI +
16EI  5 3 1 [M ] =  0 M 0 
8EI 16EI
 9  9 
3 3 1
9 9 9 9
[F] =  + + =  0 0 M 
 8EI 16EI 8EI 16EI 16EI  16EI 
 9 9 9  1 1 1
 16EI 16EI 
16EI 
301
Second Edition
4.1.3.2.3 Natural Frequencies Using the Exact Classical Determinant Method
The stiffness formulated real eigenvalue problem is expressed
[[K] − ωni2 [M]]{φ}i = 0
This equation has one additional unknown and hence does not have a unique solution. For a 3 DOF dynamic
system, there will be 3 φ terms and the ωni2 term, i.e. one additional unknown. For there to be a solution that is
nontrivial (i.e. that not all φ terms zero), the determinant must be zero. The eigenvalue problem is solved for ωni2 by
employing the classical determinant computation for a nontrivial solution,
Det [[K] − ωni2 [M]] = 0
This leads to a polynomial in ωni2 the order of which corresponds to the number of dynamic degrees of freedom.
For instance, for a 3 DOF dynamic system, the order of polynomial in ωni2 will be cubic, i.e. up to the ωni6 term.
They can be solved for the 3 natural circular frequencies ω1, ω2 and ω3. Then, in order to obtain the an eigenvector
corresponding to each eigenvalue, we replace each eigenvalue in turn into
[[K] − ωni2 [M]]{φ}i = 0
Now that we have found ωni2 based on a zero determinant, the number of independent equations becomes one less,
i.e. for the 3 DOF dynamic system, 2 independent equations. Hence for each ωni2 we can solve for the relative
values of φ. This is where we have to decide on how to normalize the eigenvectors, i.e. whether MAX, MASS or
POINT normalization.
Note that the first mode or fundamental mode refers to the mode corresponding to the lowest frequency. The other
modes are referred to as higher harmonics.
The flexibility formulated real eigenvalue problem is expressed

1
[[I] − ω 2ni [ F][M ]]{φ}i = {0} or [[F][ M ] − [ I]]{φ}i = {0}
ω 2ni
These are eigenvalue problems. For a nontrivial solution,
1
DET[[ I] − ω2ni [ F][M ]] = 0 or DET[[F][M ] − [ I]] = 0
ω 2ni
302
Second Edition
4.1.3.2.4 Natural Frequencies Using the Approximate Stodola Iterative Method
With this method, only the fundamental natural circular frequency and the fundamental mode can be obtained fairly
accurately. Higher natural circular frequencies and modes can also be obtained inefficiently with the use of the
sweeping matrix to purify the eigenvalue problem off the earlier modes of vibration. However, this method is
subjected to cumulative errors and so the errors increase in estimating the frequencies and mode shapes of higher
modes of vibration.
Stiffness formulation,
[K − ω 2 M ]φ = 0
1
Multiply by F or by − F,
ω2
1
[FK − ω 2 FM ]φ = 0 or [FM − FK ]φ = 0
ω2
1
[I − ω 2 FM ]φ = 0 or [FM − I]φ = 0 ( Flexibility formulations)
ω2
Employ the latter flexibility formulation,
1
[FM − I]φ = 0
ω2
1
FM φ = φ
ω2
Stodola ' s method,
1
FM φ = φ is akin to A x = λ x
ω2
(0 )
Guess x
For i = 0 to n
(i )
Compute A x
( i +1)
to obtain λ(i +1) and x
(i )
Normalise first coordinate of A x
Next i
1 ( n +1)
The final λ(n +1) is the and x the fundamental mode φ1 .
ω12
303
Second Edition
M
u1
1 9
12EI/33 =
3m EI 12EI/33 3
12EI / 3 x 2 8EI
M u2
1 9
3 3 3
=
3m EI 12EI/3 12EI/3 12EI / 3 x 2 8EI
1.5M u3
1 9
=
3m 2EI 12(2EI)/33 12(2EI)/33 3
12(2EI) / 3 x 2 16EI
2M
u4
1 8
4m 4EI 3(4EI)/43 3(4EI)/43 3
=
3(4EI) / 4 x 2 3EI
Displacement contribution of
Transverse stiffness floor level due to unit load at
of columns the particular level
The figure above shows a 4-degree of freedom shear frame. The flexibility formulation is described by
1
[FM − 2 I]φ = 0
ω
1
FM φ = φ
ω2
Stodola ' s method,
1
FMφ = 2 φ is akin to A x = λ x
ω
(0)
Guess x
For i = 0 to n
(i )
Compute A x
( i +1)
to obtain λ(i +1) and x
(i )
Normalise first coordinate of A x
Next i
1 ( n +1)
The final λ(n +1) is the and x the fundamental mode φ1 .
ω12
For the shear frame above,
 9 9 9 8 9 9 8 9 8 8 
 8EI + 8EI + 16EI + 3EI + +
8EI 16EI 3EI
+
16EI 3EI 3EI 
 9 9 8 9 9 8 9 8 8   263 209 155 128
 + + + + +   209 155 128
F =  8EI 16EI 3EI 8EI 16EI 3EI 16EI 3EI 3EI  = 1  209
 9 8 9 8 9 8 8  48EI 155 155 155 128
 + + +  
16EI 3EI 16EI 3EI 16EI 3EI 3EI 
 8 8 8 8  128 128 128 128
 
 3EI 3EI 3EI 3EI 
M 0 0 0 
0 M 0 0 
M= 3
0 0 M 0 
 2 
 0 0 0 2M 
304
Second Edition
Hence,
 263 209 155 128 M 0 0 0 
  0 
1  209 209 155 128  0 M 0
A = FM = 3
48EI 155 155 155 128  0 0 M 0 
  2 
128 128 128 128  0 0 0 2M 
 263 209 232.5 256
 209 232.5 256
M  209
=
48EI 155 155 232.5 256
 
128 128 192 256
 1   263 209 232.5 256  1  15.5531  1 

0.8000  209 232.5 256 0.8000 M 14.4281 15.5531M 0.9277 
    
M 209
Guess x ( 0) =  , A x (0) = = =
0.7000 48EI 155 155 232.5 256 0.7000 EI 12.4031 EI 0.7975
        
0.6000 128 128 192 256 0.6000 10.8000 0.6944
 1   263 209 232.5 256  1  17.0846  1 
0.9277   209 232.5 256 0.9277  M 15.9596 17.0846M 0.9342
    
M 209
x (1) =  , A x (1) = = =
0.7975 48EI 155 155 232.5 256  0.7975 EI 13.7909 EI 0.8072
        
0.6944 128 128 192 256 0.6944 12.0338 0.7044
 1   263 209 232.5 256  1  17.2132  1 
0.9342  209 232.5 256 0.9342 M 16.0882 17.2132M 0.9346
    
M  209
x = , Ax = = =
( 2) ( 2)
0.8072 48EI 155 155 232.5 256 0.8072 EI 13.9123 EI 0.8082
        
0.7044 128 128 192 256 0.7044 12.1432 0.7055
 1   263 209 232.5 256  1  17.2261  1 
0.9346  209 232.5 256 0.9346 M 16.1011 17.2261M 0.9347 
    
M 209
x = , Ax = = =
( 3) ( 3)
0.8082 48EI 155 155 232.5 256 0.8082 EI 13.9246 EI  0.8083
        
0.7055 128 128 192 256 0.7055 12.1544 0.7056 
Convergence is achieved to two decimal places. Thus,

1 17.2261M
= ,
ω12 EI
EI EI
fundamental frequency ω1 = = 0.2409
17.2261M M
 1 
0.93
and the fundamental mode φ1 =  .
0.81
 
0.71
For higher modes the sweeping matrix can be employed. This method is computationally intensive and the rate of
convergence depends very much on whether the initial guessed mode shape approximates the actual mode shape
sought after. Also the errors are cumulative as the sweeping matrix is a function of the previous mode shape.
Hence, higher modes are less accurate. As will be demonstrated hereafter, the first and second modes converge to
the exact solution to 3 decimal places, whilst the third mode shape is only accurate to 2 decimal places.
305
Second Edition
M
u1 u1 1 9
=
3m EI 12EI/33 12EI/33 12EI / 3 3 + 12EI / 3 3 8EI
M u2 u2
1 9
12EI/33 12EI/33 =
3m EI 12EI / 3 3 + 12EI / 3 3 8EI
M u3 u3
1 9
3m 2EI 12(2EI)/33 12(2EI)/33 =
12(2EI) / 3 + 12(2EI) / 3 16EI
3 3
Transverse stiffness Displacement contribution of

of columns floor level due to unit load at
the particular level
The figure above shows a 3-degree of freedom shear frame. The flexibility formulation is described by
1
FMφ = φ 5 3 1  M 0 0 
ω2 A = FM =
9 
3 3 1  0 M 0 
Ax = λx 16EI 
1 1 1  0 0 M 
Fundamental mode : Operate on A = FM

1  1.0000 
= 0.7 ,
4.1984M  
=
(0) ( 3)
Guess x Ax 0.7320
EI
 0.3 0.2680
Convergence is achieved to 4 decimal places after 3 iterations. Thus, 1/ω12 = 4.1984M / EI,
and the fundamental mode φ1 = [1 0.7320 0.2680].

EI EI
fundamental frequency ω1 = = 0.4880
T
4.1984M M
1
Sweeping matrix, S1 = I − φ1 φ1T M where Μ 1 = φ1T M φ1
Μ1
Second mode : Operate on A = FMS1
 1   1.0000 
= − 0.8,
0.5625M  
= − 0.9994
(0) (12)
Guess x Ax
EI
− 0.8  − 0.9995
Convergence is achieved to 4 decimal places after 12 iterations. Thus, 1/ω 22 = 0.5625M / EI,
and the second mode φ 2 = [1 − 0.9994 − 0.9995]

EI EI
ω2 = = 1.3333
T
0.5625M M
1
Sweeping matrix, S 2 = S1 − φ 2 φ 2 M where Μ 2 = φ 2 M φ 2
T T
Μ2
Third mode : Operate on A = FMS 2
1   0.9999 
= − 2,
0.3014M  
Guess x (0)
Ax ( 3)
= − 2.7358
EI
 3   3.7360 
Convergence is achieved to 4 decimal places after 3 iterations. Thus, 1/ω 32 = 0.3014M / EI,
and the third mode φ 3 = [0.9999 − 2.7358 3.7360]

EI EI
ω3 = = 1.8215
T
0.3014M M
306
Second Edition
4.1.3.2.5 Natural (Fundamental) Frequency Using the Approximate Rayleigh Quotient Method
The stiffness formulated eigenvalue problem can be solved by employing the Rayleigh Quotient method. The
basis of the method is to equate the maximum kinetic energy during motion to the maximum potential energy to
obtain an estimate of the natural circular frequency with an assumed mode shape or displacement function. With
this method, only the fundamental natural circular frequency can be obtained fairly accurately. Vibration
analysis by Rayleigh’s Quotient method will yield a fundamental natural circular frequency ω1 which is higher than
the actual because of the approximation made by the mode shape φ(x). Higher natural circular frequencies can be
obtained only if the exact higher mode shapes are known.
Improved Rayleigh Quotient Method
(a) Guess mode shape based on the displacements produced by applying inertial forces as static loads. That is
to say, load the structure with the inertial loads associated with an assumed displacement. This load then
results in a new improved displacement configuration. Loop for even better estimate or simply goto (b).
(b) Apply Rayleigh’s formula to obtain an estimate of ωi
ωi2 =
Generalised Stiffness of Mode i, K i {φ } [K ]{φi } =
= iT
T
∑ k ∆φ
i
2
i
Generalised Mass of Mode i, Mi {φi } [M ]{φi } ∑m φ 2

i i
(c) From the obtained estimate of the eigenvalue, obtain a better estimate of the eigenvector from
[[K] − ωni2 [M]]{φ}i = 0
with the eigenvector normalized in the same method as before. Loop to (b) for a new estimate of the
eigenvalue based on the new eigenvector. This is repeated until convergence. The stiffness of the calculated
system is always greater than the stiffness of the exact system as we are modelling a system of infinite
DOFs with a finite number of DOFs. The value of ω1 decreases as the mode shape becomes closer to the
actual fundamental mode shape. Hence, the calculated natural circular frequency will always be greater
than the exact value. Seek to obtain the lowest possible estimate of ω for convergence.
M
u1 1.0
3m EI
M u2
0.8
3m EI
1.5M u3 0.7
3m 2EI
2M
u4 0.6
4m 4EI
Assumed Mode Shape
Assumed Force on the Force on Displacement Displacement of Improved

Freedom Mode Freedoms Shear Frame Contribution of Shear Frame Mode
Shape Miφiω2 (Cumulative) Floor Level (Cumulative) Shape
1 1.0 Mω2 Mω2 Mω2/(24EI/27) 15.55Mω2/EI 1
2 0.8 0.8Mω2 1.8Mω2 1.8Mω2/(24EI/27) 14.43Mω2/EI 0.93
3 0.7 1.5M(0.7ω2) 2.85Mω2 2.85Mω2/(48EI/27) 12.40Mω2/EI 0.80
4 0.6 2M(0.6ω2) 4.05Mω2 4.05Mω2/(24EI/64) 10.80Mω2/EI 0.69
307
Second Edition
 12 EI 12 EI   24 24 
 2 × 33 − 2×
33
0 0   27 − 0 0 
  27
 24 
 − 2 × 12 EI 12 EI
4× 3 − 2×
12 EI
0  −
48
−
24
0 
K= 33 3 33  = EI  27 27 27 
 12 EI 12 EI 12( 2EI) 12( 2EI)   24 8 48 
 0 − 2× 3 2× 3 + 2× − 2×   0 − − 
 3 3 33 3 3
 27 3 27
12( 2EI) 12( 2 EI) 3(4 EI)   48 155 
 0 0 − 2× 2× + 2 ×  0 0 − 
 33 33 4 3   27 72 
M 0 0 0   1 
0 0  0.93
M 0  
M= φ1 =  
0 0 1 .5 M 0  0.80 
  0.69 
0 0 0 2M 
Hence, the fundamental natural circular frequency ω1 is given by
ω12 =
K1 {φ }T [K ]{φ1 } = 0.2194EI = 0.0581 EI
= 1T ∴ ω1 = 0.2410
EI
M1 {φ1 } [M ]{φ1 } 3.7771M M M
The alternative approach to the calculation is to use the following formula. However, the former approach above is
more recommended as defining the storey stiffnesses below can be tricky.
ω12 =
∑ k ∆φ i
2
i
∑m φ i
2
i
12EI/33 12EI/33
12EI/33 12EI/33
12(2EI)/33 12(2EI)/33
3(4EI)/43 3(4EI)/43
Transverse stiffness
of columns
 12EI   12EI   12(2EI)   3(4EI) 

 2 x 3 (1.0 − 0.93) +  2 x 3 (0.93 − 0.80) +  2 x (0.80 − 0.69) +  2 x
2 2 2 2
(0.69)
ω12 =
∑ k i ∆φ i2
=
 3   3   3 3
  43 
∑m φ i
2
i M x 1.0 2 + M x 0.93 2 + 1.5M x 0.80 2 + 2M x 0.69 2
0.2194EI EI
= = 0.05809
3.7771M M
EI EI
ω1 = 0.05809 = 0.2410
M M
308
Second Edition
Rayleigh Quotient Method – No Improvement To Guessed Mode Shape
The Rayleigh Quotient expression can also be rewritten in terms of the static displacements as follows. This is
employed in Earthquake Engineering codes of practice for the fundamental period of structures.
T1 = 2π
∑Wδ 2
i i
g∑ W δ
i i
The static deflections due to the horizontal application of the weight of the structure are obtained from a static
analysis program. It need not be the gravity forces that are applied, but any inertial force that produces a deflected
shape corresponding to the mode shape of interest. The static horizontal deflected shape of the structure resembles
the fundamental mode shape of the vibrational analysis because the p0i/Ki term is largest for the fundamental mode
since higher modes are less significant in contributing to the static response. This method however does not
employ the repetitive improved estimates of the Improved Rayleigh Quotient method until convergence of
the mode shape. Hence if the mode shape estimate is incorrect, so will be the natural frequency. Of course,
the static displacement should be calculated assuming a weight corresponding to the loading for which the
frequency is required, i.e. usually a dead load with an allowance for the expected live load. Vertical bending modes
of single span beams and plates can be found knowing the static deflections at various points (hence assuming
lumped mass DOFs at those points). For the horizontal mode of vibration of an entire structure, the gravity force
must be applied laterally. For multi-span beams, say a two span continuous beam, the fundamental mode is an
antisymmetric mode. Hence, if the static loads were applied all in the same direction, we would be predicting the
frequency of the symmetric mode, which is higher. This is an example where the assumed mode shape was totally
incorrect. The repetitive improved estimates of the Improved Rayleigh Quotient method above would have detected
this. The static load should have been applied downwards in one span and upwards in the other to produce a
deflected shape that somewhat resembles the fundamental asymmetric mode.
Lumped Mass Rayleigh Quotient Method – Lumped Mass & No Improvement To Guessed Mode Shape
The above Rayleigh Quotient expression can also be rewritten in terms of the static displacement and lumping the
mass to a single mass DOF. For SDOF systems, we have said that the natural frequency can be estimated from
1 k
fn =
2π m
This is the Rayleigh Quotient expression for SDOF systems if you like. Replacing the mass term with weight, W,
we have
g k g k g 1
fn = = = = 15.76 u st in mm
2π mg 2π W 2π u st u st
Which now relates the natural frequency to the static deflection ust of a single lumped mass dynamic DOF. This
formula is exact ONLY for single lumped mass systems. We can approximately extend this to MDOF systems
but the numerical factor 15.76 will be different generally between 16 and 20; 18 is quite practical. But of course,
this is a fudge to account for the fact that we are not taking static deflections at various mass DOFs, but
simply at one solitary mass DOF. The advantage of this method is that it is simple. If the static deflection is
known from various standard static deflection equations, the natural frequency can be determined, albeit very
approximately. Vertical bending modes of single span beams and plates can easily be found knowing the midpoint
static deflection (hence assuming a lumped mass DOF in the middle). For the horizontal mode of vibration of an
entire structure, the gravity force must be applied laterally and the lateral deflection at the top of the equivalent
vertical cantilever is employed (hence assuming that the lumped mass DOF is at the top of the building).
309
Second Edition
4.1.3.2.6 Natural Frequencies Using the Rayleigh-Ritz Method
The Rayleigh Quotient method gives the first mode of vibration only. Ritz extended this method to give a few more
modes.
The full eigenvalue problem is expressed as
([K] − ωi2[M]) {φi} = {0} i = 1 to the number of DOF in original system, n
But with the approximation of {φ} = [Ψ]{z}, the reduced eigenvalue problem can be expressed as
([K*] − ωi2[M*]) {zi} = {0} i = 1 to the number of Ritz vectors in reduced system, s < n
Hence, the following procedure is undertaken
(a) [K] and [M] are established
(b) The Ritz vectors [Ψ] = [{Ψ1},{Ψ2},…{Ψs}] are assembled, where s < n
(c) Compute [K*] = [Ψ]T[K][Ψ] and [M*] = [Ψ]T[M][Ψ]
(d) Solve the reduced eigenvalue problem
([K*] − ωi2[M*]) {zi} = {0}

Det ([K*] − ωi2[M*]) = 0
Hence, ωi and {zi} obtained, i = 1 to s
(e) The s (not n) approximate mode shapes in the original system is obtained
{φi} = [Ψ]{zi} obtained, i = 1 to s
(f) The number of good approximation of modes = s / 2; Hence, Ritz extended Rayleigh’s method to give
s / 2 modes with good accuracy
310
Second Edition
4.1.3.3 Natural Frequencies of Distributed Systems
4.1.3.3.1 Natural (Fundamental) Frequency Using the Approximate Rayleigh Quotient Method
The Rayleigh Quotient Method is approximate because of the approximation of the mode shape. The closer the
mode shape resembles the true mode shape, the more accurate the natural frequency estimation.
For the flexural Bernoulli-Euler beam of length L with additional lumped masses and stiffnesses the natural circular
frequency ωi is given by
n2
EI( x ){φ′′( x )} dx + ∑ k jφ2j
L
∫
2
Generalised Stiffness K i 0
j=1
ωi2 = = n1
Generalised Mass Mi
m( x ){φ( x )} dx + ∑ m i φi2
L
∫
2
0
i =1
The number of coefficients in the polynomial approximation of the mode shape φ(x)
= the number of geometric and static boundary conditions + 1
One is added because one coefficient will cancel out in Rayleigh’s formula.
Geometric boundary conditions:

Fixed end φ(x) = 0 and φ′(x) = 0
Pinned end φ(x) = 0
Free end in rotation and translation None
Free end with spring ks None
Free end in translation only φ′(x) = 0
Static boundary conditions:

Note that M(x) = EI(x)φ″(x) and V(x) = M′(x) = EI(x)φ″′(x)
Fixed end None
Pinned end φ″(x) = 0
Free end in rotation and translation φ″(x) = 0 and φ″′(x) = 0
Free end with spring ks φ″(x) = 0
Free end in translation only None
311
Second Edition
4.1.3.4 Natural Frequencies By Exactly Solving the Partial Differential Equilibrium Equation
In reality, all systems have distributed mass, damping and stiffness properties. The finite element method
discretizes the continuous system with a finite number of degrees of freedom resulting in a set of second order
ordinary differential equations (ODEs). Continuous systems on the other hand result in one partial differential
equation of at least second order. The reason for this is that on top of having the time variable, continuous systems
also include the spatial variable as there are not discrete DOFs. Because of the mathematical complexity of
generating and solving (integrating) these partial differential equations, this method is limited to simple structures.
4.1.3.4.1 The Bernoulli-Euler Beam
The Bernoulli-Euler beam equation of motion, which is based on simple bending theory assuming that plane
sections remain plane, no shear deformation and no axial force effects results in the equation of motion
∂4u ∂2u
EI + m = P(x, t ) m = mass per unit length
∂x 4 ∂t 2
where u is the transverse displacement. Note that the Timoshenko beam equation extends the Bernoulli-Euler beam
theory to include shear deformations and rotary inertia and should be used if such effects matter. Solving the
corresponding free vibration PDE analytically by the method of separation of variables leads to two ODEs, which
yield the following natural circular frequencies and mode shapes
EI
ω n = (aL )
2
mL4
φ( x ) = A sin ax + B cos ax + C sinh ax + D cosh ax
By applying various boundary conditions to these equations, various solutions may be found. The modal mass is
L
Mi = m ∫0
φ( x ) 2 dx
Note that i refers to the natural modes, i = 1, 2, 3 … etc.
Boundary Natural
(aiL)2 Term Mode Shapes Modal Mass
Conditions Frequencies
cos(aL)cosh(aL) – 1 = 0 φ i ( x ) = cosh a i x − cos a i x − σ i (sinh a i x − sin a i x )
EI
ωni = (a i L )2
Fixed-Free cosh a i L + cos a i L
thus (aiL)2 = 3.5160, 0.25mL
(Cantilever) mL4 σi =
22.0345, 61.6972 … sinh a i L + sin a i L
sin(aL) = 0
iπx
ωni = (a i L )
Simply EI aix
φi ( x ) = sin = sin
2
thus, (aiL)2 = (iπ)2, i = 1, 0.50mL
Supported mL4 L L
2, 3 …
Fixed-Simply
tan(aL) – tanh(aL) = 0 φi ( x ) = − cosh a i x + cos a i x + σi (sinh a i x − sin a i x ) M1 = 0.439mL
ωni = (a i L )
Support EI
thus (aiL)2 = 15.4118,
2
− cosh a i L + cos a i L M 2 = 0.437 mL
(Propped mL4 σi =
Cantilever)
49.9648, 104.2477 … − sinh a i L + sin a i L M3 = 0.437 mL
cos(aL)cosh(aL) – 1 = 0 φ i ( x ) = cosh a i x + cos a i x − σ i (sinh a i x + sin a i x )
ωni = (a i L )
EI
Free-Free thus (aiL)2 = 22.3733,
2
cosh a i L − cos a i L
mL4 σi =
61.6728, 120.9034 … sinh a i L − sin a i L
cos(aL)cosh(aL) – 1 = 0 φ i ( x ) = cosh a i x − cos a i x − σ i (sinh a i x − sin a i x ) M1 = 0.394mL
ωni = (a i L )
Fixed-Fixed EI
thus (aiL)2 = 22.3733, 2
− cosh a i L + cos a i L M 2 = 0.439mL
(Encastre) mL4 σi =
61.6728, 120.9034 … − sinh a i L + sin a i L M 3 = 0.437 mL
The modal mass for the simply supported beam is half the total mass for all the modes and that for the cantilever is
quarter the total mass for all modes.
312
Second Edition
The natural frequencies of a simply-supported Bernoulli-Euler beam with axial force (positive P being tension) are
f ni =
(iπ)2 EI 
1 +
PL2 

2π mL4  EIi 2 π 2 
 
313
Second Edition
4.1.3.4.2 The Shear Beam
In reality, both shear and bending deformations must be accounted for when computing the frequencies of the
beam. Shear deformation become prominent in deep (with respect to the span) beams. Hence the equivalent
building cantilever beam model tends to be more of a shear mode. We are talking about the global behaviour of the
building and not the shear deformation of individual column members, which are generally flexural. Note that shear
frequencies are proportional to 1/L whilst bending frequencies are proportional to 1/L2.
The Southwell-Dunkerly formula can then be used to combine the effects of both bending and shear deformations
(of course both deformations have to occur in the same mode to be compatible) to obtain a frequency estimate as
follows.
1 1 1
2
= 2 + 2
f n f n bending f n shear
314
Second Edition
4.1.3.4.3 Anisotropic Plate Simply-Supported
The mode shapes are described by
For mb = 1 (higher modes in this direction of much higher frequencies), the natural frequencies are
Note only bending deformation

accounted for; no shear deformation.
The modal mass is then
For MAX normalized mode shapes, the modal masses for ALL modes of the simply supported anisotropic plate
are quarter of the total mass.
Flat Slab
Dx and Dy are flexural rigidity per unit width
For unit width beam, the flexural rigidity, D = EI = Eh3/12 per unit width whilst for unit width plate, the flexural
rigidity, D = EI = Eh3/[12(1-ν2)] per unit width. The torsional rigidity H should be such that it is equal to the
bending rigidity D so that there is equal bending stiffness of the plate about any horizontal axis. The natural
π Eh 3
frequency of a square flat slab plate simply supported all round is f =
a2 (
12m 1 − ν 2
.
)
315
Second Edition
One-way Composite Spanning
Two-way Composite Spanning
Ribbed Section in One Direction
Ribbed Section in Two Directions
Dx is the flexural rigidity per unit width for bending about y-axis (or bending in x-z plane).
Dy is the flexural rigidity per unit width for bending about x-axis (or bending in y-z
plane); Iy = t.(H-h)3/12 + Aweb(lever arm)2 + (ay.h3/12)[ax/(ax-tortho+tortho.αortho3)] +
Aslab(lever arm)2; Note the factor [ax/(ax-tortho+tortho.αortho3)] to account for the effect of
the orthogonal ribs on the bending stiffness. Thus here αortho = h/Hortho where (Hortho -
h) is the depth of the orthogonal ribs and tortho is the thickness of the orthogonal ribs.
316
Second Edition
4.1.3.5 Approximate Formulae
4.1.3.5.1 Multi-Storey Buildings
A good approximate fundamental frequency formula for single-storey buildings, multi-storey buildings and towers
is (Bachmann and EC1-2.4:1995)
f = 46 / h (Hz)
where h is the height (m).
Alternatively, EC8 recommends for buildings up to 80m,
where
and Ct for structures with concrete or masonry shear walls is given by
Another approximations is
where
4.1.3.5.2 Cable Stayed Bridges
A good approximate fundamental frequency formula for cable stayed bridges is (Bachmann)
317
Second Edition
f = 110 / L
where L is the length of the main span (m).
4.1.3.5.3 Highway Bridges
A good approximate fundamental frequency formula for highway bridges is (Bachmann)

f = 100 / L
where L is the length of the main span (m).
318
Second Edition
4.2 GL, ML Implicit Direct Complex Modal (Eigenvalue) Analysis
The equation of motion for a free, damped system is

[M ]{&u&( t )} + [C]{u&( t )} + [K ]{u ( t )} = {0}
We seek solutions of the form
[
{u(t)}i = Re al {φ}i ξ i e λ i t ] for the i th
mode of vibration
where ξ i = ξ Ri + iξ Ii and λ i = α i + iω di
Note that α represents the decaying part and ω d the damped natural frequency.
Hence, substituti ng into the equation of motion
[M ]ξ i λ2i {φ}i e λ i t + [C]ξ i λ i {φ}i e λ i t + [K ]ξ i {φ}i e λ i t = {0}
[λ [M] + λ [C] + [K]]{φ}
2
i i i = {0}
This is a complex eigenvalue problem to be solved for λ i and {φ}i .
For completion, the response due to mode i, {u(t)}i of a free damped linear elastic structure subjected to
an initial impact (defining an initial displacement and velocity) is
[
{u(t)}i = {φ}i Re al ξ1i e λ1i t + ξ 2i e λ 2i t ]
{u(t)}i = {φ} Re al [(ξ
i 1Ri + iξ1Ii )e (cos ω di t + i sin ωdi t ) + (ξ 2 Ri + iξ 2 Ii )e α t (cos ωdi t − i sin ω di t )]
αi t i
{u(t)}i = {φ} Re al [e
i
αt
i
[((ξ1Ri + ξ 2 R ) cos ωdi t − (ξ1Ii − ξ 2 Ii ) sin ω di t ) + i((ξ1Ii + ξ 2 Ii ) cos ωdi t + (ξ1Ri − ξ 2 Ri ) sin ω di t )]]
For the free vibration response to be real for all t,
ξ1Ii = −ξ 2 Ii and ξ1Ri = ξ 2 Ri
Since there are two less independent constants, let
ξ1Ii = −ξ 2 Ii = ξ Ii and ξ1Ri = ξ 2 Ri = ξ Ri
We notice that ξ1i and ξ 2i are a complex conjugate pair
ξ1i = ξ Ri + iξ Ii and ξ 2i = ξ Ri − iξ Ii
Hence
{u(t)}i = {φ}i e αi t (2ξ Ri cos ω di t − 2ξ Ii sin ω di t )
Thus the total response due to the superposition of all modes
{
{u(t)} = [Φ ] e αi t (2ξ Ri cos ω di t − 2ξ Ii sin ω di t ) }
In the real eigenvalue analysis, for each mode i, NASTRAN outputs,
one real root ω ni representing the undamped natural circular frequency
one real eigenvector {φ}i representing the real mode shape
Complex eigenvalue analysis with viscous (and structural optional) damping, for each mode i, NASTRAN outputs,
two complex roots which are a complex conjugate pair, α i + iω di and α i − iω di , where
α i is negative and represents the decaying constant
ω di is positive and represents the damped natural circular frequency
two complex eigenvectors which are a complex conjugate pair, {φ R + iφ I }i and {φ R − iφ I }i
Complex eigenvalue analysis with only structural (and no viscous) damping, for each mode i, NASTRAN outputs,
one complex root, α i + iω di , where
ω di is positive and represents the damped natural circular frequency
one complex eigenvector, {φ R + iφ I }i
319
Second Edition
4.2.2 Complexity of Modes of Vibration
A pure real mode has all its terms in phase which each other. Different modes will of course be out of phase with
each other, but every point in a particular mode will vibrate in phase. And so, for a mode, all points in the structure
reach its maximum and minimum at the same phase instant. A complex mode on the other hand will have different
points of the structure reaching its maximum at different phase instants, i.e. different points of the structure are out
of phase with each other for a particular mode. Of course, different modes are still out of phase with each other.
The degree to which these points are out of phase with each other is a measure of the complexity of the mode. An
Argand diagram with all the terms of the complex eigenvector plotted will exhibit a narrowband if the mode is only
slightly complex. The diagram below shows plots for 4 eigenvector terms. Since there is only a slight phase
difference between the terms (angle between the arrows), the 4 terms define an almost real complex eigenvector.
Im
Re
The following eigenvector plot on the other hand is highly complex because of the large phase angle difference
between the terms of the eigenvector.
Im
Re
The animation of the complex modes is quite indicative of the complexity of the mode. In complex modal analysis,
each mode has two complex conjugate eigenvectors. Each eigenvector has a real and imaginary part. The animation
of such a complex mode is only of value when we plot the magnitude of either (of the two complex conjugate)
eigenvectors. The phase information (which is obtained when the magnitude and argument of the real and
imaginary components are obtained) is essential in order to determine the relative phase of the motion of different
parts of the structure. In a real mode, there is no phase information, and hence the animation of a real mode will
show all parts of the structure vibrating in-phase with each other. Explicit viscous dampers will cause parts of the
structure to vibrate clearly out-of-phase. This clearly occurs when explicit viscous dampers are used to damp
prestressed cable vibrations. A cable with a damper element of a very high damping coefficient attached to its
center will behave as two separate cables, the damper element effectively producing a fixity at the center of the
cable. This changes the fundamental mode shape of the cable from one of a low frequency to two cable mode
shapes of higher fundamental frequency.
4.2.3 Complex Modal Analysis To Determine Modal Damping Values
Because the solution by complex modal analysis yields a decaying constant αi for each and every mode, the modal
damping can be obtained as modal structural damping, Gi = 2αi/ωdi.
320
Second Edition
4.2.4.1 GL, ML Complex Modal Analysis
SOL 107
$ Grid output of displacement for each mode i.e. eigenvector
$ SORT1 lists the results by eigenvalue whilst SORT2 lists the results by grid id
DISPLACEMENT(<SORT1/SORT2>,<PRINT,PUNCH,PLOT>,<REAL/PHASE>) = ALL/<Grid Set ID>
$ Grid output of displacement for each normalized mode i.e. normalized eigenvector
SDISPLACEMENT(<SORT1/SORT2>,<PRINT,PUNCH>,<REAL/PHASE>) = ALL/<Grid Set ID>
SPCFORCES(<SORT1/SORT2>,<PRINT,PUNCH,PLOT>,<REAL/PHASE>) = ALL/<Grid Set ID>
ELFORCE(<SORT1/SORT2>,<PRINT,PUNCH,PLOT>,<REAL/PHASE>) = ALL/<Element Set ID>
ELSTRESS(<SORT1/SORT2>,<PRINT,PUNCH,PLOT>,<REAL/PHASE>) = ALL/<Element Set ID>
STRAIN(<SORT1/SORT2>,<PRINT,PUNCH,PLOT>,<REAL/PHASE>) = ALL/<Element Set ID>
$ Analysis Requests
CMETHOD = < ID IN EIGC >
$ XY plot output
OUTPUT(XYPLOT)
XYPUNCH <DISP/VELO/ACCE> RESPONSE <subcase>/<Grid ID>(<T1/T2/T3><RM/IP>)
The EIGC bulk data card is required.
The METHOD commonly used is CLAN. NORM, G, and C have to do with the specification of the method of
normalization. The eigenvectors may be normalized either to a unit value at grid point G for coordinate C, or for
the largest term to be of unit magnitude. E is used to specify the convergence criterion of the solution. Each method
has a different default value for this criterion, and each is adequate for most problems. The following continuation
is repeated for each desired search region. (J = 1 to n, where n is the number of search regions).
As mentioned, replacing the following into the free damped equation of motion
results in the following complex eigenvalue problem
where
321
Second Edition
If α=0, the radian frequency, ω of complex eigenvalue analysis is the same as that of real eigensolutions. The real
part, α, is a measure of the decay rate of a damped structure, or if negative, the rate of divergence of an unstable
system. The imaginary part, ω, is the modified frequency in radians/unit time. However, roots with negative values
of ω should be treated as special terms. The recommended practice is to specify one point α1=0.0 and ω1 at the
lower bound of the expected range of eigenvalues, but not at 0.0. A second shift may be input at α2=0.0 and ω2 at
the upper bound of the expected range. All ALPHABj and OMEGABj must be blank.
The eigenvalue output for a sample problem is shown below.
The column labeled (REAL) contains α1, and the column labeled (IMAG) contains ω1. The column labeled
(FREQUENCY) contains the circular frequency. The last column is the damping coefficient computed from the
equation
which is approximately twice the value of the conventional modal damping ratio. Note that if the magnitude of this
term is computed to be less than 5.0x10-4, it is reset to zero. For small values, the damping coefficient is twice the
fraction of critical damping for the mode. The eigenvalues are sorted on ω, with the negative values sorted first
(there are none in this example), sorted on increasing magnitude, followed by the eigenvalues with positive ω,
again sorted on magnitude. Roots with equal ω values are sorted next on α.
322
Second Edition
4.2.4.2 GL, ML P-∆ (KGA From KEA) Complex Modal Analysis
Phase 1
Phase 2
(KGA From KEA) complex modal response.

SUBCASE 1
SUBCASE 2
LABEL = P-∆ Complex Modal Analysis
CMETHOD = < ID in EIGC >
323
Second Edition
324
Second Edition
4.2.4.3 GL, ML P-∆ (KGA From Exact or Approximate KTA) Complex Modal Analysis
The above top deck solves the linear modal complex eigenvalue problem. It is often necessary to include the
differential stiffness, especially if there are prestressed cables in the model and the mode shapes are sought. To
obtain KTA, to be theoretically exact, a GNL SOL 106 (or implicit dynamic relaxation SOL 129 or explicit dynamic
relaxation LS-DYNA) with prestress (as temperature loads say) and gravity must be undertaken. Alternatively, an
approximation to KTA can be obtained by repetitive P-∆ static analyses with the prestress (as temperature loads say)
and gravity applied. The procedure to obtain this approximate KTA will be presented. Note that the approximate KTA
will be the summation of the elastic stiffness KE at the undeflected (by the prestress and gravity) state but KG at the
deflected (by the prestress and gravity) state. Hence if KE changes considerably during the application of the
prestress, a full SOL 106 (or implicit dynamic relaxation SOL 129 or explicit dynamic relaxation LS-DYNA),
which converges to the KE and KG at the deflected (by the prestress and gravity) state should be employed. Hence
for the modelling of a suspension bridge where there is a great change in geometry (known in the bridge industry as
form-finding, so-called because it is necessary to find the form or shape of the catenary suspension cables), it may
be prudent to employ SOL 106 (or implicit dynamic relaxation SOL 129 or explicit dynamic relaxation LS-
DYNA), but for a high tension low sag cable on say a tower with prestressed cables, the repetitive P-∆ static
analysis may be adequate. The repetitive P-∆ analysis basically involves a number of iterations of linear static
analyses to obtain an approximate KTA. Note again that A refers to the initial undeflected (by the collapsing load)
state, but deflected by the prestress and gravity. To perform the repetitive P-∆ analysis, a static analysis is
performed based on KEA with temperature loads and gravity to generate forces in the structural elements, which in
turn provides input for the computation of KGiAKTm where m is the iterations. Repetitive static analysis is performed
with the prestress and gravity updating the stiffness matrix KEA + KGiAKTm-1 + KGiAKTm until convergence of
displacements is obtained. The tangent stiffness at this stage is the approximate converged tangent stiffness matrix
KTA = KEA + KGiAKT. The converged displacements represent the approximate P-∆ (KGA From Approximate KTA)
static response to the initial prestress loads. The converged geometric stiffness at this stage would be that based
upon the approximate tangent stiffness matrix KTA, i.e. KGiAKT.
Phase 1
Phase 2
Phase 3
Phase 4
Approximate KTA) complex modal response.
325
Second Edition
4.2.5.1 Determination of Damped Natural Frequency and the Maximum Dynamic Displacement, umax for
Free Damped Vibration Due to Initial Displacement and/or Initial Velocity by Classically Solving
the SDOF Linear ODE and Maximizing the Solution
Equation of motion (linear second order ODE)

m&u&( t ) + cu&( t ) + ku ( t ) = 0
[ ]
Assume u(t) = Re al Ge λt where G = G R + iG I and λ = α + iω d
2 λt
mGλ e + cGλe λt + kGe λt = 0
(mλ )
+ cλ + k Ge λt = 0
2

(mλ 2
+ cλ + k = 0) as Ge λt > 0
2 2
c  c  k c  c  k
λ1 = − +   − λ2 = − −   −
2m  2m  m 2m  2m  m
Hence the general solution is the superposition of the two possible solutions,
[
u(t) = Re al G 1e λ1t + G 2 e λ 2 t ]
The exact form depends on the value of the viscous damping coefficient, c.
Case : critically damped c = c cr = 2 km = 2mω n , the two roots are real and repeated,
c cr 2 km
λ1 = λ 2 = − =−
2m 2m
Hence,
c cr
−
u(t) = (G 1 + G 2 t )e
t
2m
There will be no oscillatory motion, instead simply an exponentia l decay.
Case : overdamped c > c cr , the two roots will be real and distinct,
u(t) = G 1e λ1t + G 2 e λ 2 t
Again, there will be no oscillatory motion, instead exponential decay in a longer time.
326
Second Edition
Case : under - damped, c < c cr , the roots are complex conjugates ,

2 2
c k  c  c k  c 
λ1 = − +i −  λ2 = − −i − 
2m m  2m  2m m  2m 
employing Euler' s equations,
e iθ = cos θ + i sin θ
e −iθ = cos θ − i sin θ
2
k  c 
hence, writing ωd = − 
m  2m 
 −
c
−
c

u ( t ) = Re al (G 1R + iG 1I )e 2 m (cos ωd t + i sin ωd t ) + (G 2 R + iG 2 I )e 2 m (cos ωd t − i sin ω d t )
t t
 
 −ct 
u ( t ) = Re al e 2 m [((G 1R + G 2 R )cos ωd t − (G 1I − G 2 I )sin ωd t ) + i((G 1I + G 2 I )cos ω d t + (G 1R − G 2 R )sin ω d t )]
 
for the free vibration response to be real for all t,
G 1I = −G 2 I and G 1R = G 2 R
sin ce there are two less independen t constants, let
G 1I = −G 2 I = G I and G 1R = G 2 R = G R
we notice that G 1 and G 2 are a complex conjugate pair
G 1 = G R + iG I and G 2 = G R − iG I
hence
c
−
[(2G R cos ωd t − 2G I sin ωd t )]
t
u(t) = e 2m
defining the damping ratio ζ such that

c = ζc cr = ζ 2 km = ζ 2mω n
the damped natural circular frequency,
2
ωd =
k  ζ 2 km
−
m  2m

 =

k ζ2k
−
m m
=
k
m
( )
1 − ζ 2 = ωn 1 − ζ 2

hence,
u ( t ) = e −ζωn t [(2G R cos ωd t − 2G I sin ωd t )]
where ωd = ω n 1 − ζ 2 and 2G R , − 2G I being the constants of integratio n from the initial conditions .
Note also that we often define the decaying constant
c
α=−
2m
hence since c = ζ 2mω n
ζ 2 mω n
α=−
2m
α = −ζω n
327
Second Edition
Damping causes the damped natural frequencies to be a little less than the undamped natural frequencies, but the
difference is negligible in real structures, which are under-damped. Hence, the old classroom example of measuring
the natural frequency of a pendulum in air and in water gives a lower frequency in water simply because of the
added water mass in the dynamic model.
We have established that for under - damped free vibrations

u ( t ) = e −ζωn t [(2G R cos ωd t − 2G I sin ωd t )]
With initial displacement and velocity conditions,
 u&(0) + u (0)ζω n 
u ( t ) = e −ζωn t  u (0) cos ωd t + sin ωd t  where ωd = ω n 1 − ζ 2
 ωd 
Hence, the maximum dynamic displacement
2
 u&(0) + u (0)ζω n 
u max = u (0) + 
2

 ωd 
2π
The motion is oscillatory with a period of Td = , the amplitude decreasing exponentially.
ωd
The damping ratio ζ can be estimated experimentally from two displacement peaks separated by mTd ,
2π 2π 2π 2 πζm
ζω m ζm
un e −ζωn t1 ζωn m n
ωn 1−ζ 2
= −ζω ( t + mT ) = e ζωn mTd = e ωd
= e 1−ζ = e 1−ζ
2 2
=e
u n+m e n 1 d
The logarithmic decrement is defined as the natural log of the ratio between successive peaks (m = 1),
un 2πζ
δ = ln = ≈ 2πζ
u n +1 1− ζ2
328
Second Edition
4.3 GL, ML Implicit (Real) Modal Frequency Response Analysis
4.3.1 Nature of the Dynamic Loading Function
The solution method can be used to solve dynamic systems subjected to: -
(a) Deterministic periodic harmonic long duration loading functions
A deterministic periodic forcing function has regularly repeating amplitude. The sine or cosine function is said to
be harmonic. Because the periodic function repeats itself, any initial starting transient response is insignificant and
the steady state response is of interest, hence the solution is performed in the frequency domain. The starting
transient normally decays away after 50-100 cycles of oscillation for light damping. The steady-state oscillatory
response occurs at the same frequency as the loading phase shifted due to damping.
In this LINEAR FREQUENCY DOMAIN solution, not only that the static response has to be added separately,
but also the mean of the dynamic excitation has also got to be added separately as a static response. This is because
the mean of the dynamically applied force is not included in the dynamic excitations. Hence the total response in
this frequency domain dynamic analysis = static response to mean of dynamic excitation + dynamic response
+ static response to static loads.
In the modal frequency analysis, the solution of a particular forcing frequency is obtained through the summation
of the individual modal responses. With the knowledge of the modal frequencies and corresponding mode shapes,
the coupled system of simultaneous dynamic equilibrium equations can be uncoupled by premultiplying the
dynamic equation of motion by [Φ]T as shown below. This means that the simultaneous ODEs no longer need to be
solved simultaneously and so the MDOF system of equations is reduced to a SDOF system of equations, which can
be solved independently of each other. The computational benefit comes from not having to run a rigorous
simultaneous equation solver. The knowledge of the modal frequencies and the corresponding mode shapes are a
prerequisite to this implicit modal frequency response analysis, hence the implicit real (note not complex)
eigenvalue analysis must be performed first. Because of the fact that the modes are real and do not take into
account the explicit elemental (structural and viscous) damping within the structure, the coupled ODEs cannot be
uncoupled by [Φ]T. The system of coupled ODEs remains in the existence of structural and/or viscous damping and
the simultaneous equation solver must be invoked. The only difference then between SOL 111 and SOL 108 is the
fact that the former solves the equations in the modal coordinates instead of the physical coordinates. Hence, as
long as sufficient modes are included (to represent both the static and dynamic response of the system), SOL 111
will give the same solution as SOL 108 even with large values of structural and/or viscous damping. We know that
large values of elemental damping will modify the mode shape and frequencies. However, a SOL 111 can still be
performed because a true (real) modal approach is not undertaken, instead the coupled ODEs are solved using a
direct approach, but in the modal coordinates. However, the use of the FREQ4 card, which bases the excitation
frequencies to be solved for on the real natural frequencies may prove to be insufficient. This is because with high
values of elemental viscous damping, certain local modes can be totally eliminated. For instance, viscous dampers
with high coefficients of damping on cables can considerably alter the natural frequency of the local mode and even
eliminate a local mode altogether. In this case, the FREQ4 card will not capture the response at the damped natural
frequency. Hence, these damped natural frequencies need to be known (by performing a SOL 107) before choosing
the excitation frequencies to be solved for using FREQ2 cards. To reiterate, SOL 111 reverts to a direct solution
technique (akin to SOL 108) when there is either viscous or structural element damping as the equations of motion
cannot be orthogonalized. But the unknowns are still the modal responses and not the physical responses. And
because with damping the modes are really complex modes, there is greater difficulty in capturing all the response
using the real modes. Hence, even more modes are thus required to capture the response accurately in SOL 111
with element damping especially if the elemental damping is high enough to cause significant complex modes.
Thus if elemental damping is high and the modes are complex, the direct method SOL 108 may be more
appropriate. If a true modal approach is intended for the solution of coupled ODEs with structural and/or viscous
damping, then a complex modal forced frequency response analysis is necessary, although this is quite impractical.
329
Second Edition
The modal matrix from the free, undamped modal analysis is

[Φ ] = [{φ}1 ... {φ}i ... {φ}n ]
The coupled system of ODEs of the undamped forced vibration equation of motion is
[M ]{&
u&( t )} + [K ]{u ( t )} = {P( t )}
In the frequency domain, let
{u(t)} = Re al [[Φ ]{ξ(ω)}eiωt ] where {ξ(ω)}is a complex modal displacement response function vector
{P(t)} = Re al [{P(ω)}e iωt ] where {P(ω)}is a harmonic loading function vector
This transformation is worth a little explanation. The harmonic forcing function in the time domain P(t) is
transformed into the frequency domain simply by multiplying
{P( t )} = Re al [{P(ω)}e iωt ]
{P(ω)} is the complex harmonic forcing function. The harmonic term is eiωt. {P(ω)} can be frequency dependent
and/or can even be complex in general. If {P(ω)} is complex, this refers to harmonic loading functions which are
out of phase with respect to each other. We usually assume that {P(ω)} is frequency independent and also just real,
such that {P(ω)} = {p0}. The frequency domain complex forcing function {P(ω)} is specified in NASTRAN with
the RLOAD1 and RLOAD2 cards. The harmonic term is inferred naturally. Note that in the modal approach of the
response analysis, the complex modal response is ξi(ω) and that the total complex response function is F(ω).
{F(ω)} = [Φ ]{ξ(ω)}
It must be stressed that the specified frequency domain excitation is the complex harmonic forcing function
{P(ω)} and that the corresponding complex total response vector is {F(ω)}. If {P(ω)} is complex, then {F(ω)} will
be complex. If {P(ω)} is only real, than {F(ω)} will be real if there is no damping in the system but will be
complex if there is damping in the system. The curves for {F(ω)} versus ω is what is produced by the NASTRAN
output in a frequency domain analysis. It can be viewed in its real and imaginary components versus ω, or in its
magnitude and phase versus ω, the latter of which is what should be observed to ascertain the response. To
summarize
Frequency domain loading function from the time domain loading function
[
{P( t )} = Re al {P(ω)}e iωt ]
where {P(ω)} is the complex loading function vector
Frequency domain complex modal response to {P(ω)} is
{ξ(ω)} which is complex in general
Frequency domain complex total response function vector
{F(ω)} = [Φ ]{ξ(ω)}
where {F(ω)} is complex in general
Time domain total response from the frequency domain complex total response
[
{u ( t )} = Re al {F(ω)}e iωt ]
330
Second Edition
We have specified that

{u ( t )} = Re al [[Φ ]{ξ(ω)}e iωt ]
This transforms the physical coordinates {u(ω)} to modal coordinates {ξ(ω)}. The mode shapes [Φ ] are used to transform the
problem in terms of the behavior of the modes as opposed to the behavior of the grid points. This equation represents an
equality if all the modes are used, but since all the modes are rarely used, the equation usually represents an approximation.
Hence, the equation for harmonic motion in terms of the modal coordinates is
−[M ][Φ ]{ξ(ω)}ω 2 e iωt + [K ][Φ ]{ξ(ω)}e iωt = {P(ω)}e iωt
−ω 2 [M ][Φ ]{ξ(ω)} + [K ][Φ ]{ξ(ω)} = {P(ω)}
Premultiplying by [Φ ]T reduces the coupled system of ODEs to a system of uncoupled ODEs
−ω 2 [Φ ]T [M ][Φ ]{ξ(ω)} + [Φ ]T [K ][Φ ]{ξ(ω)} = [Φ ]T {P(ω)}
−ω 2 [M]{ξ(ω)} + [K ]{ξ(ω)} = {P(ω)}
where
the diagonal generalised (modal) mass matrix, [M] = [Φ ]T [M ][Φ ]
[ ]
the diagonal generalised (modal) stiffness matrix, [K] = [Φ ]T [K ][Φ ] = ω n 2 [M]
the generalised (modal) force vector, {P(ω)} = [Φ ] {P(ω)}
T
The matrices [M] and [K] are diagonal because of the orthogonality condition of the normal modes
{φi }T [M ]{φ j } = 0 and {φi }T [K ]{φ j } = 0 if i≠ j
Accordingly, the generalised mass solitary term and the generalised stiffness solitary term
associated with a particular mode ' i' are
M i = {φ i } [M ]{φ i } K i = {φ i } [K ]{φ i } = ω 2ni M i
T T
and
And because these matrices are diagonal, the equations become uncoupled and is easy to solve for {ξ(ω)}.
Hence, the set of uncoupled SDOF systems is
−ω 2 M i ξ i (ω) + K i ξ i (ω) = Pi (ω)
Pi (ω)
ξ i (ω) = for i = 1 to n modes
− ω 2Mi + K i
which is solved for the individual modal responses ξ i (ω).
Finally, the total physical response is the superposition of the individual modal responses
{u ( t )} = Re al [[Φ ]{ξ(ω)}e iωt ]
{u ( t )} = Re al [{F(ω)}e iωt ]
In modal frequency response analysis, mode truncation refers to not utilizing all the natural modes in computing the
response of the structure. At a minimum all the modes that have resonant frequencies that lie within the range of
the forcing frequencies have to be retained. For better accuracy, all the modes up to at least 2 to 3 times the highest
forcing frequency should be retained. For example, if a structure is excited between 200 and 2000 Hz, all modes
from 0 to at least 4000 Hz should be retained as the forcing frequencies still excite the higher modes although not
resonating with them, i.e. off-resonant excitation. The recommendation of using modes up to 2 or 3 times the
highest excitation frequency assumes that the static response can be captured adequately using this finite number of
modes. Clearly, if the distribution of applied loads is multiple concentrated forces, then the finite number of modes
may still not be sufficient to capture the difficult static shape. In this case, it may be prudent to use static residual
vectors instead of increasing the number of vibration modes solely to capture the static response.
331
Second Edition
The following damping models are supported by the solution scheme

I. elemental damping
i. viscous damping Yes
ii. structural damping Yes
II. modal damping
III. global proportional viscous damping
i. mass proportional damping No
ii. stiffness proportional damping Yes
iii. Rayleigh damping No
If explicit viscous damping element contributions are made to the damping matrix [C] or if elemental structural
damping is specified such that a complex stiffness matrix exists, then neither the damping nor the stiffness matrices
can be diagonalized by the modal matrix. In this case the modal frequency response analysis solves the still coupled
problem using a direct frequency approach but in terms of the modal coordinates {ξ(ω)} instead of the physical
coordinates {u(t)}. Since the number of modes used in a solution is typically much less than the number of physical
variables, using the coupled solution of the modal equations is less costly than using physical variables. Hence,
with elemental viscous and/or elemental structural damping, the coupled system of ODEs of the damped
harmonically forced vibration equation of motion is given by
[M ]{&
u&( t )} + [C ]{u&( t )} + [ K ]{u ( t )} = {P ( t )}
where
[ K ] = (1 + iG )[ K ] + i ∑G E [K E ]
[C ] = ∑ [C E ]
Hence,
[− ω [Φ ] [M ][Φ ] + iω[Φ ] [C][Φ ] + [Φ ] [K ][Φ ]]{ξ(ω)} = [Φ ] {P(ω)}
2 T T T T
The modal frequency response analysis solves the still coupled problem using a direct frequency approach but in
terms of the modal coordinates {ξ(ω)} instead of the physical coordinates {u(t)}.
If however only viscous modal damping ζi is specified, the generalized damping matrix [Φ]T[C][Φ] remains
diagonal and so the uncoupled equations of motion can be maintained. The uncoupled equations of motion become
−ω2Mi ξ i (ω) + i(ζ i 2Mi ω n i )ωξ i (ω) + K i ξ i (ω) = Pi (ω) for i = 1 to n modes
Pi (ω)
ξ i (ω) =
− ω2Mi + i(ζ i 2M i ωn i )ω + K i
The animation of the forced frequency response is quite indicative of the nature of the response of the structure to
harmonic excitations. The forced frequency response analysis will yield for each node, both real and imaginary
responses. The animation of the forced response of the structure as a whole (at any particular frequency of
excitation) is only of value when we plot the magnitude of the response, and not the individual real or imaginary
components. The phase information (which is obtained when the magnitude and argument of the real and
parts of the structure. Explicit viscous dampers will cause parts of the structure to vibrate clearly out-of-phase.
332
Second Edition
If only structural modal damping Gi is specified, modal damping is processed as a complex stiffness of each
individual mode and so the uncoupled equations of motion can still be maintained. The uncoupled equations of
motion become
−ω2Mi ξ i (ω) + (1 + iG i (ω)) K i ξ i (ω) = Pi (ω) for i = 1 to n modes
Pi (ω)
ξ i (ω) =
− ω2M i + (1 + iG i (ω)) K i
It is important to know how to convert between structural damping and equivalent viscous damping for a particular
mode. For a particular mode,
Viscous damping, Fviscous = ζ i (critical damping) (mod al velocity)

= ζ i (2Mi ωn i ) (iωξi {φi })
Structural damping, Fstructural = iG iK i ξi {φi }
For the two forms to be equal, Fviscous = Fstructural
ζ i (2Mi ωn i ) (iωξi {φi }) = iG iK i ξi {φi }
In the special case that ω = ωn i
ζ i (2Mi ωn i ) = G iK i
2
ζ i (2MiK i / Mi ) = G iK i
2ζ i = G i
Hence, the relationship Gi = 2ζi can be used to specify an equivalent viscous damping for structural damping, but is
only exact when the forcing frequency ω = the natural modal frequency ωni which occurs at resonance, i.e. when
damping is of primary importance.
The complex response function due to a loading {P(ω)} is defined as
{F(ω)} = {P(ω)}
−ω 2
[M ] + iω[C] + [K ]
The complex transfer function is defined as the complex frequency response function due to unit harmonic
excitations
[H(ω)] = 1
− ω [M ] + iω[C] + [K ]
2
This is the so-called transfer function that transfers the excitation to the response as follows
[
{u ( t )} = Re al [H (ω)]{P(ω)}e iωt ]
The (magnitude of the) dynamic amplification function D(ω) is defined as the magnitude of the complex response
function {F(ω)} divided by the static displacement.
333
Second Edition
4.3.3 Capability of A Finite Number of Modes To Model The Static and Dynamic Response of Structure
When running a modal based dynamic response analysis, it is imperative to know if the chosen number of modes
within the modal dynamic analysis is capable of representing both the static and dynamic response of the structure.
First and foremost, the chosen modes must cover and extend beyond the excitation frequency range such
that both the resonant response of the modes within the range and the off-resonant response of the modes
beyond (from say a 1/3rd of lowest excitation frequency to 3x the highest excitation frequency) the range are
captured. This will sufficiently model the dynamic response. Considerations then must be made for the finite
number of modes to capture the static response.
It is often said in dynamic analyses that if the chosen finite number of modes are capable of representing the static
response, then they will usually also be able to represent the dynamic response of the structure. We shall consider
the frequency domain as this enables us to plot the FRF (and hence of course also the transfer function and the
dynamic amplification function). Let us picture the (magnitude of the) dynamic magnification function, here shown
below for a single mode, i.e. a SDOF system.
Damping Controlled
Dmax ≈ Dresonant = 1/(2ζ)
Stiffness Controlled
D Inertia Controlled
ω
0
ωn
The finite number of modes should be able to represent the true static displacement at zero excitation frequency and
the maximum (magnitude of the) dynamic amplification. Obtaining just the correct maximum (magnitude of the)
dynamic amplification is not proof that the chosen finite number of modes is sufficient. This is because the
response D(ω) at the frequency corresponding to the maximum dynamic response is controlled only by the
damping within the structure. Note that the corresponding value F(ω) is also a function of the modal stiffness (or
modal mass), the natural frequency and the (amplitude of the) modal force. Hence if the static response is
inaccurate, so will be the dynamic response. Thus it is best to compare the response function F(ω) between the
modal model and the full MDOF model.
To compare individual components of the modal model, the following approach is undertaken. First, the accuracy
of the stiffness representation is investigated. This corresponds to the static displacement. When the excitation
frequency is zero, if the modal approach with SOL 111 achieves the same F(ω) response as that from a static
analysis SOL 101, then the chosen finite modes are capable of representing the stiffness within the system and
hence are capable of modelling the static response for the system. The mathematics of converting the static
equilibrium equations in physical coordinates to equations in modal coordinates (and hence with a certain degree of
modal truncation unless the number of modal coordinates equals the number of physical coordinates) is presented
in Section 3.1.4.
Thereafter, the damping representation is evaluated by comparing the response F(ω) at the frequency of maximum
amplification. Finally, the inertial representation is evaluated by comparing the response F(ω) at high excitation
frequencies. If the responses obtained from the modal approach when the excitation frequency is off-resonant is
similar to that obtained from the multi degree of freedom model, then the chosen finite number of modes are
capable also of modelling the mass and stiffness distribution within the system.
334
Second Edition
Hence, in order to quantitatively decide whether the chosen number of finite modes is capable of representing a
multi degree of freedom system the response between a direct solution SOL 108 and the modal solution SOL 111 is
compared. The complex frequency response function F(ω) can be plotted for the response at the DOF of interest
from both a SOL 108 and a SOL 111. A XYPLOT showing the contribution of individual modal responses F(ω)
superposed on a plot containing the total physical response is most useful in visually determining the contribution
of each and every mode to the static and dynamic response at particular frequencies of excitation. In
MSC.NASTRAN, it is possible to plot the response function F(ω) for individual natural modes using SOL 111
(even if there is structural and/or viscous damping as SOL 111 then performs a coupled ODE solution process, but
with the unknowns as the modal responses instead of the physical responses) by delimiting the mode calculated
using EIGRL or using LFREQ (lower limit of the frequency range), HFREQ (upper limit of the frequency range) or
LMODES (number of lowest modes retained). Alternatively, selective modes which are not sequential can be
deleted by the user by using the alter delmodea.v2001 and the associated bulk data entry DMI. The degree of
similarity between the two traces is an indication of the ability of the finite number of modes to represent the
response of the system. The number of modes should be increased or decreased accordingly. Note that the static
response at zero excitation frequency obtained from both SOL 111 and SOL 108 can be compared with the true
static solution from a SOL 101. It will be found that SOL 108 will yield the same static response as SOL 101 (when
there is no structural damping within the finite element model) whilst SOL 111 will yield a result that is lower due
to the nature of the finite number of modes presenting a stiffer response. Incidentally, since SOL 108 does not
allow the automatic specification of the frequency points to correspond to the natural frequencies of the structure,
the user would have to perform a SOL 103 and manually specify to increase the resolution near the vicinity of the
natural frequencies.
It is essential that the sufficient modes be incorporated when derived quantities are intended. For instance, to
evaluate the modal damping of a particular mode, both the static response and the dynamic response must be
accurately represented. If the static response is not sufficiently captured, then the dynamic response will not be
accurate either as the response of the FRF = P/K times D(ω). If the distribution of the excitation force is
concentrated at multiple points, then it is likely that the difficult static shape requires many modes of vibration. In
this case, it may be better to utilize static residual vectors to capture the response more directly. Alternatively of
course, the direct frequency approach SOL 108 may be used, in which case the static response and the dynamic
response of all modes are automatically captured, but it requires effort in capturing the peak response (by
requesting fine frequency intervals near the peaks). But when using the modal method, damping estimates using the
half power bandwidth on the FRF of the D(ω) or using 1/(2ζ) on the D(ω) depend on the capability of the modes to
accurately represent the static and dynamic response. Where in doubt, use a SOL 101 solution to check the static
response. And a SOL 107 solution should be used to check the modal damping estimates.
The relative contribution of each mode to the total static and dynamic response can also be determined. This is
known as the modal responses, i.e. the value of the modal variables in the modal solution scheme. The Case
Control Cards SDISP, SVELO and SACCE will produce the modal solution set output, {ξi(ω)}. These are plots of
the modal response (for each mode) in terms of frequency of excitation, i.e. the frequency domain modal response.
That is to say, SDISP(PUNCH) (or SVELO or SACCE) will output one value for each mode at each excitation
frequency. These are the modal responses in modal space. They must be multiplied by the corresponding mode
shapes in order to obtain the modal responses in physical space i.e.
{Fi(ω)} = {φi}ξi(ω)
Another method of determining the modal contribution of individual modes to a particular excitation is by using the
modal strain energy. Firstly, to evaluate the ability of the natural modes to represent the static response, a SOL 101
is run with the amplitude of the dynamic loads applied as a static load and the results are written to a DMIG file
using the alter pchdispa.v2001. Then a SOL 103 us run with the DMIG included and also the alter modevala.v2001
to ascertain how well each and every mode can represent the static solution. The strain energy for each mode can
be compared to the strain energy in all the modes calculated and also the input vector. Note that the eigenvector
scaling must be set to the default MASS (not MAX) for this alter to be valid. Secondly, to evaluate the ability of the
natural modes to represent the dynamic response, the alter mfreqa.v2001 is utilized for SOL 111. The results are
presented in a matrix of strain energies with the rows representing the excitation frequencies and the columns
335
Second Edition
representing the natural modes. The frequency interval between the rows and between the columns corresponds to
the excitation frequency interval and the natural mode frequency interval. Of course, the dominant modes that
represent the static response is not necessarily the same as the dominant modes that represent the dynamic response
at different excitation frequencies. This is simply because the dynamic response is also a function of the loading
frequency and resonance frequency, on top of the static response. Including the dominant modes that represent the
static response will however improve the accuracy of representing the dynamic response F(ω) as it is the function
of the amplification D(ω) and the static response P/K.
Note that the capability of a finite number of modes to represent the static and dynamic response of the structure is
limited to a particular force excitation direction and distribution. If the force changes its location or direction,
then the prominence of the different modes which will be different. This is simply because changing the location or
direction of the force will cause a different set of modal forces and hence a different level of excitation of the
different modes. The capability of a finite number of modes to represent the static and dynamic response of the
structure depends also on the level of elemental structural and elemental viscous damping present within the
system. This is because, the level of elemental damping affects the complexity of the modes, hence possibly
requiring more real modes if the modal complexity is high. Thus damping should be included when performing the
study to determine the required number of modes.
For accurate results of modal methods, static residual vectors (PARAM, RESVEC, YES) can be calculated
except when using the seismic large mass method for enforced motion. The residual vector method is more
efficient than the mode acceleration method and can be applied to both superelements and the residual structure
when substructuring is employed. Clearly though, there should be sufficient modes comfortably beyond within the
excitation frequency bandwidth to capture the dynamic response, and the static residual vectors should only be used
as a final step to append the quasi-static responses of high frequency (relative to the excitation frequencies) modes.
Note that SOL 111 reverts to a direct solution technique (akin to SOL 108) when there is either viscous or
structural element damping as the equations of motion cannot be orthogonalized. But the unknowns are still the
modal responses and not the physical responses. And because with damping the modes are really complex modes,
there is greater difficulty in capturing all the response using the real modes. Hence, even more modes are thus
required to capture the response accurately in SOL 111 with element damping especially if the elemental damping
is high enough to cause significant complex modes. Thus if elemental damping is high and the modes are complex,
the direct method SOL 108 may be more appropriate.
Another method of determining the adequacy of the finite number of modes is to evaluate the cumulative effective
mass of the chosen number of modes. The effective mass has got a specific meaning in seismic analysis, but can be
used for other dynamic analyses as well as a measure of determining the adequacies of the finite number of modes.
A cumulative effective mass that approaches unity suggests adequacy of the chosen modes to model the spatial
distribution of the loading. This parameter of course does not say much about the adequacy of the chosen modes
to model the frequency content of the loading. Essentially, and to reiterate, the chosen number of modes must be
sufficient to model both the frequency content and also the spatial distribution of the loading. It is found that for
a high cumulative effective mass, uniformly distributed loads such as in seismic analyses require only a few modes
whereas a concentrated patch requires more modes and finally a highly concentrated load requires a much greater
number of modes to capture the effect of the spatial distribution of the loading.
336
Second Edition
4.3.4 Complex Response F(ω) and Amplification D(ω) With Elemental and/or Modal Structural Damping
The response at zero excitation frequency from a forced frequency response analysis (SOL 111 or SOL 108) will
not be equal to the true static response (from a SOL 101 solution) if there is elemental or modal structural damping
within the model. Intuitively, we know this to be true simply due to the fact that structural damping is independent
of forcing frequency. Hence, there is no reason for it to be zero at an excitation frequency of zero. We shall
illustrate this mathematically for modal structural damping although the same concept applies when there exist
elemental structural damping. We know that the (magnitude of the) dynamic amplification factor for a mode when
there is modal viscous damping is
1
D i (ω) =
(1 − ω 2
/ ω ni )
2 2
+ (2ζ i ω / ω ni )
2
If however we have modal structural damping, the modal equation of motion will be
−ω 2 M i ξ i (ω) + i(ζ i 2M i ω n i )ωξ i (ω) + (1 + iG i ) K i ξ i (ω) = Pi (ω)

Pi (ω)
ξ i (ω) =
− ω M i + i(ζ i 2M i ω n i )ω + (1 + iG i ) K i
2
Pi (ω)
ξ i (ω) =
− ω M i + i(C i ω + G iK i ) + K i
2
By complex arithmetic, we arrive to

Pi (ω) / K i
ξ i (ω) = e − iθ i
(1 − ω 2
/ ω ni )
2 2
+ (G i K i + 2ζ i ω / ω ni )
2
And hence the (magnitude of the) modal dynamic amplification factor will be
1
D i (ω) =
(
1 − ω 2 / ω ni
2 2
)
+ (G iK i + 2ζ i ω / ω ni )
2
At zero excitation frequency, the (magnitude of the) dynamic amplification is thus not unity, but instead
1
D i (ω) =
1 + (G i K i )
2
As an aside, the (magnitude of the) dynamic amplification at resonance is

1
D i (ω) =
G i K i + 2ζ i
Thus, in general, with structural damping, the amplification at zero frequency is less than one simply due to the
nature of structural damping being independent of excitation frequency. This should obviously not be the case for a
true static solution since the static response is independent of damping. Hence, the response obtained at zero
frequency from a forced response analysis of a system with structural damping is not the true static solution. This
means that in order to derive the (magnitude of the) dynamic amplification function in a model with structural
damping, it is necessary to perform a static solution SOL 101 to ascertain the actual static displacement and then
divide the magnitude of the complex response function F(ω) from a SOL 108 solution by this value.
337
Second Edition
4.3.5 Representation of A MDOF System As A SDOF system
A SDOF dynamic model is represented by a modal mass M, modal stiffness and modal damping. This SDOF
model can even be modeled as a mass attached to a parallel spring and damper although hand calculations are
sufficient to predict the response of a SDOF system exactly. The natural frequency is a function of the modal mass
and modal stiffness. The modal masses, modal stiffnesses (or natural frequencies) of a MDOF system can be
obtained from a real eigenvalue analysis SOL 103 or a back calculation from a SOL 111 analysis. The modal
damping can be obtained from a complex modal analysis SOL 107.
It will be shown that modes with small values of modal damping can be approximated simply as real modes
(without its imaginary component). Hence, a real modal mass can be used. If however, the mode includes larges
values of modal damping, its complex modal mass must be evaluated and subsequently a complex modal forced
response analysis must ensue.
Estimation of Real Modal Mass From A Forced Frequency Response Analysis Back-Calculation On A
System Without Any Form of Damping
This procedure is shown just to illustrate the dynamic response function. It is certainly as easy to obtain the modal
mass from a real eigenvalue analysis. To determine the modal mass from a forced response back-calculation, the
following procedure is undertaken. We know that
P
F(ω) = D(ω)
K
P P
Hence, the static displacement = = 2
K ω M
In order to compute the modal mass from a back-calculation of the forced response analysis, a SOL 111 should be
performed with EIGRL limiting the calculated modes to only that being considered. Then the relationship above
can be used to estimate the modal mass. Note that the static displacement obtained will be due only to the
eigenvector being considered. The modal mass obtained using this method will correspond exactly to that
calculated from
Modal Mass, Mi = {φi}T[M]{φ i}
Modal Mass of Modes With Small Values of Damping
We know that
P
F(ω) = D(ω)
K
P P
Hence, the static displacement = = 2
K ω M
This shows that the modal mass is a function of the static displacement and not the (magnitude of the) dynamic
amplification at resonance. At resonance, only damping controls the (magnitude of the) dynamic amplification
response D(ω) of the structure. It is however, not true to say that the dynamic response F(ω) is controlled just by
damping as it is also a function of the modal stiffness (or modal mass). At off-resonant frequencies stiffness,
damping and inertia effects become prominent. The static displacement of the structure with or without damping in
reality will be the same as long as elemental damping does not significantly alter the mode shape. At zero
frequency of excitation, damping in reality does not affect the response because there are no dynamic effects.
Hence, from the equation above, it becomes apparent that the modal mass M does not change as long as the natural
frequency of the mode does not change significantly. As a rule, as long as the mode shapes and the natural
338
Second Edition
frequency does not change too much with explicit damping elements (the mode shapes will not change with other
forms of damping, such as modal damping; note that the frequency does not change much unless the modal
damping values are very high), then the modal mass will stay unchanged. This could be an argument to prove that
the modal mass for a mode of a system with low values of damping stays unchanged from the same mode without
damping, which is readily obtainable from a SOL 103 solution.
Modal Mass of Modes With Large Values of Damping
However, how do we obtain the modal mass from a complex mode if the eigenvector changes considerably from
that without explicit element dampers? A pure real mode has all its terms in phase which each other. Different
modes will of course be out of phase with each other, but every point in a particular mode will vibrate in phase.
And so, for a mode, all points in the structure reach its maximum and minimum at the same phase instant. A
complex mode on the other hand will have different points of the structure reaching its maximum at different phase
instants, i.e. different points of the structure are out of phase with each other for a particular mode. Of course,
different modes are still out of phase with each other. The degree to which these points are out of phase with each
other is a measure of the complexity of the mode. An Argand diagram with all the terms of the complex
eigenvector plotted will exhibit a narrowband if the mode is only slightly complex. The diagram below shows plots
for 4 eigenvector terms. Since there is only a slight phase difference between the terms (angle between the arrows),
the 4 terms define an almost real complex eigenvector.
Im
Re
between the terms of the eigenvector.
Im
Re
The eigenvectors of cable elements for instance can change considerably when explicit dampers with high
coefficients are placed onto them. Then the modal damping values can become very high (such as even 15 to 20%
of critical). If this occurs, the real modal mass is a poor representation of the mode. Instead, a complex modal mass
must be evaluated. Hence, a real modal approach should thus not be used in this case. Instead a (rather
mathematically involved) complex modal forced response analysis is required. Alternatively, a full MDOF analyses
should be undertaken to investigate the response.
SOL 111 reverts to a direct solution technique (akin to SOL 108) when there is either viscous or structural element
damping as the equations of motion cannot be orthogonalized. But the unknowns are still the modal responses and
not the physical responses. And because with damping the modes are really complex modes, there is greater
difficulty in capturing all the response using the real modes. Hence, even more modes are thus required to capture
the response accurately in SOL 111 with element damping. Thus if elemental damping is high, the direct method
SOL 108 may be more appropriate.
339
Second Edition
4.3.6.1 GL, ML Modal Forced Frequency Response Analysis
SOL 111
$ Grid output of displacement, velocity and acceleration for excitation frequencies
$ SORT1 lists the results by frequency whilst SORT2 lists the results by grid id
VELOCITY(<SORT1/SORT2>,<PRINT,PUNCH,PLOT>,<REAL/PHASE>) = ALL/<Grid Set ID>
ACCELERATION(<SORT1/SORT2>,<PRINT,PUNCH,PLOT>,<REAL/PHASE>) = ALL/<Grid Set ID>
$ Grid output of applied load vector
OLOAD(<SORT1/SORT2>,<PRINT,PUNCH,PLOT>,<REAL/PHASE>) = ALL/<Grid Set ID>
$ Grid output of modal responses (in modal space)
SDISPLACEMENT(<SORT1/SORT2>,<PRINT,PUNCH>,<REAL/PHASE>) = ALL/< Mode Number >
SVELOCITY(<SORT1/SORT2>,<PRINT,PUNCH>,<REAL/PHASE>) = ALL/< Mode Number >
SACCELERATION(<SORT1/SORT2>,<PRINT,PUNCH>,<REAL/PHASE>) = ALL/< Mode Number >
$ Analysis Cards
METHOD = < ID IN EIGRL >
FREQUENCY = < ID OF FREQi >
$ XY plot output
OUTPUT(XYPLOT)
XYPUNCH <SDISP/SVELO/SACCE> RESPONSE <subcase>/<Grid ID>(<T1/T2/T3><RM/IP>)
$ BULK DATA
Lower Upper Eigenvalue
Number of
EIGRL ID Frequency Frequency Normalization
Eigenvalues
(Hz) (Hz) Method
Number
FREQ1 ID fstart ∆f
of ∆f
flower fupper
FREQ4 ID FSPD NFM
bound bound
All FREQi entries with the same selected ID, selected by the FREQUENCY entry in the Case Control Section, will
be combined. The FREQ1 bulk data entry selects the frequencies at which the frequency response analysis is
performed. It is important to specify a fine enough frequency step size ∆f to adequately predict peak response. Use
at least five to ten points across the half-power bandwidth. For maximum efficiency, an uneven frequency step size
should be used. Smaller frequency spacing should be used in regions near resonant frequencies, and larger
frequency step sizes should be used in regions away from resonant frequencies. FREQ4 defines a frequency spread
FSPD for each and every normal mode that occurs within the bounds of the frequency range with NFM evenly
340
Second Edition
spaced frequencies per spread. Hence, to choose 11 equally spaced frequencies across a frequency band of 0.7fn to
1.3fn for each natural frequency within flower bound and fupper bound, FSPD = 0.30 and NFM = 11. The spread should
definitely be greater than the half-power bandwidth, which for a SDOF system is approximately 2ζfn because ζ ≈
(f2-f1)/2fn hence the spread f2-f1 ≈ 2ζfn.
FREQ3 specifies excitation frequencies in the range between two modal frequencies. The increments between
excitation frequencies are calculated linearly or logarithmically. These frequencies may be clustered towards the
end points of the range of towards the center by specifying a cluster parameter.
Printed .f06 frequency response output can be in SORT1 or SORT2 format. In the SORT1 format, the results are
listed by frequency i.e. for each frequency the results of all grid points are given, whilst in the SORT2 format, the
results are listed by grid point i.e. for each grid point the results of all frequencies are given. In the modal frequency
response analysis, PARAM, CURVPLOT, 1 and PARAM, DDRMM, -1 are required to obtain SORT1 output. To
define frequency frozen structural plots,
DISPLACEMENT(PLOT,PHASE)=ALL
$ BULK DATA
PARAM,DDRMM,-1
PARAM,CURVPLOT,1
For each frequency of excitation, the magnitude of the response at each and every point in the structure is animated
with the phase information. It is meaningless and impossible to plot the real and imaginary components, as the
animation requires the phase difference between different points in the structure. It is prudent to limit the
frequencies of excitation so as to limit the amount of output.
341
Second Edition
4.3.6.1.1 Applied Load Excitations
Applied load excitations are as described in direct forced frequency response analysis.
4.3.6.1.2 Enforced Motion
Enforced motion is as described in direct forced frequency response analysis.
4.3.6.1.3 Damping
Viscous and structural modal damping is defined as follows. TYPE refers to the type of damping units, i.e. whether
structural damping G (default), critical damping CRIT or quality factor Q. The values of fi and gi define pairs of
frequencies and damping. Straight-line interpolation is used for modal frequencies between consecutive fi values.
Linear extrapolation is used for modal frequencies outside the entered range. ENDT ends the table input. If
PARAM, KDAMP, 1 then the modal damping is processed as critical damping and if PARAM, KDAMP, -1 then
the modal damping is processed as structural damping, NASTRAN internally making use of ζi = Gi/2 and Qi = 1/Gi
to convert to the required coefficient from that specified by TYPE.
SDAMPING = < ID IN TABDMP1 >

$ BULK DATA
PARAM, KDAMP, 1 $ modal damping processed as critical damping
PARAM, KDAMP, -1 $ modal damping processed as structural damping, complex stiffness
TABDMP1 ID TYPE
f1 g1 f2 g2 F3 g3 f4 g4
f5 g5 f6 g6 … … ENDT
342
Second Edition
4.3.6.2 GL, ML P-∆ (KGA From KEA) Modal Forced Frequency Response Analysis
Phase 1
Phase 2
(KGA From KEA) response to the dynamic excitation.

SUBCASE 1
SUBCASE 2
LABEL = P-∆ Modal Frequency Response Analysis
DLOAD = < ID OF RLOAD1 or RLOAD2 >
343
Second Edition
When a static subcase is specified for linear transient response analysis (SOLs 109 and 112) with
STATSUB(PRELOAD), the data recovery is controlled by PARAM, ADSTAT. By default (YES) the static
solution will be superimposed on the dynamic response solution (displacement, stress and SPCForce). The relative
solution can be obtained in reference to the static solution point by PARAM, ADSTAT, NO. No provision is made
for frequency response analysis, because the static responses contribute only to the zero frequency response.
344
Second Edition
4.3.6.3 GL, ML P-∆ (KGA From Exact or Approximate KTA) Modal Forced Frequency Response Analysis
It is often necessary to include the differential stiffness, especially if there are prestressed cables in the model. To
Phase 1
Phase 2
Phase 3
Phase 4
Approximate KTA) response to the dynamic excitation.
345
Second Edition
4.3.7.1 Determination of Maximum Dynamic Displacement for Deterministic Frequency Domain Loading
by Transforming the Coupled MDOF Linear Damped ODEs To a Set of Independent (Uncoupled)
SDOF ODEs and Solving the Independent Equations in a Manner Similar to Solving a SDOF ODE
Linear frequency domain hand methods are capable of analyzing: -
Multi-Modal Response To Deterministic Periodic Harmonic Long Duration Loading Functions
A coupled MDOF system of linear ODEs must be uncoupled to a set of independent SDOF system of linear ODEs
if any feasible hand method computation is to be employed. These independent SDOF ODEs can be solved using
standard techniques of solving SDOF linear dynamic ODEs. The final stage to the analysis is to employ a modal
superposition method to express the total response as a summation of the results from the solution of the individual
modal equations. Note that since the modal frequencies and the corresponding mode shapes are required to
uncouple the coupled MDOF ODEs, the real eigenvalue analysis must be performed first. It was shown that a
system of coupled MDOF ODEs could be reduced to a system of independent SDOF ODEs by employing the
orthogonality properties of real modes
−ω 2 M i ξ i (ω) + iC i ωξ i (ω) + K i ξ i (ω) = Pi (ω)

where the generalized (or modal) terms are obtained from solving the real eigenvalue problem
M i = {φ i } [M ]{φ i }
T
C i = {φ i }T [C]{φ i } = ζ i 2M i ω n i
K i = {φ i } [K ]{φ i } = ω 2ni M i
T
Pi (ω) = {φ i } {P(ω)}
T
The modal properties (i.e. modal masses, modal frequencies and hence modal stiffness) can be obtained by
performing a real modal analysis SOL 103 and if required the modal damping can also be incorporated from a
complex modal analysis SOL 107. The normalization of the mode shapes can be arbitrary. The normalization
technique employed will not affect the value of the modal frequencies but of course will determine the values of the
modal masses (and hence modal damping and stiffnesses) and the (amplitude of the) modal force. Although the
normalization technique is arbitrary, it is recommended that the normalization employed would facilitate the
calculation of the (amplitude of the) modal force since this is a hand calculation. To facilitate the computation, it is
wise to choose the normalization to be unity at the DOF of application of the external excitation. Either way, the
modal force (for a particular mode) for discrete loading points is calculated as follows
Pi (ω) = {φ i } {P(ω)}
T
Had the loading been continuous, a continuous modal force can also be calculated by hand (or a spreadsheet) as
follows
L
Pi (ω) = ∫ φ i ( x ){P( x , ω)}dx
0
For the special case, which is most common in reality, when the complex harmonic force vector is independent of
the frequency of excitation and simply real, we have {P(ω)} = {p0} and hence,
[ ]
{P( t )} = Re al {P(ω)}e iωt
= Re al [{p }e ]
0
iωt
hence Pi (ω) = {φ i } {p 0 }
T
= p 0i
346
Second Edition
There will be n uncoupled ODEs for n natural modes. These are now simply SDOF ODEs, which can be solved
using complex arithmetic. Hence, the complex modal response (in modal space)
Pi (ω) p 0i
ξ i (ω) = =
− ω M i + iC i ω + K i − ω M i + i C i ω + K i
2 2
From complex number the ory

x + iy =  x 2 + y 2 e iθ , θ = tan −1 ( y / x )
 
Changing the denominato r to a polar complex form
p 0i Ci ω 2ζ i ω / ω ni
ξ i (ω) = , θ i = tan −1 = tan −1
( )
K i − M i ω 2 + (C i ω)2 e iθi
2 K i − Miω 2
1 − ω 2 / ω ni
2
( )
p 0i / K i 2ζ i ω / ω ni
ξ i (ω) = e −iθi , θ i = tan −1
(1 − ω 2
/ ω ni )
2 2
+ (2ζ i ω / ω ni )2 (1 − ω 2
/ ω ni
2
)
This can be written very illustratively as
p 0i − iθi 2ζ i ω / ω ni
ξ i ( ω) = D i ( ω) e , θ i = tan −1
Ki 1 − ω 2 / ω ni(2
)
where the real modal amplificat ion factor and its maximum are
1 1
D i (ω) = ; D i max =
(
1 − ω 2 / ω ni
2 2
+ (2ζ i ω / ω ni ) )
2 2ζ 1 − ζ 2 ( )
Thus, the steady-state solution in the time domain
{u (t )} = Re al [[Φ ]{ξ(ω)}e iωt ]

 
{u (t )} = Re al [Φ ]D(ω) p 0 e −iθ e iωt 
  K  
{u (t )} = Re al [Φ ]D(ω) p 0 e i( ωt -θ) 

  K 
{u (t )} = [Φ ]D(ω) p 0 cos(ωt - θ)

 K 
Note that this expression is to be interpreted as
 p 01 
 D1 (ω) cos(ωt - θ1 ) 
 K1 
 ... 
 p 0i 
{u (t )} = [{φ}1 ... {φ}i ... {φ}n ] D i (ω) cos(ωt - θi ) 
 Ki 
 ... 
 p 0n 
D n (ω) cos(ωt - θ n )
 K n 
347
Second Edition
Note that p0i corresponds to the amplitude of the modal loading function Pi(ω) and not simply the amplitude of the
loading function {P(ω)}, i.e. p0 at any particular node. Of course, if the normalization of the mode was such that it
was unity at the DOF of application of the external force with amplitude p0 then, p0i will be equal to p0.
For a 2 DOF system, this expression would be
 p0 
 D1 (ω) 1 cos(ωt - θ1 ) 
 u 1 ( t )   φ11 φ12   K1 
 =   
u 2 ( t ) φ 21 φ 22   p
D 2 (ω) 2 cos(ωt - θ 2 )
0
 K2 
The above computation takes into account the phase difference between the responses of different modes. It is
important to point out that the maximum of the modal responses ξi(ω) do not occur at the same time. The frequency
domain response ODE can only be solved for a particular excitation frequency ω at a time. For a particular ω there
will be different responses ξi(ω) from different modes, differing in amplitude of response Di(ω), static displacement
and in phase θi. Because there is a difference in phase angle between the responses of each and every mode from
2ζ i ω / ωni
θ i = tan −1
(1 − ω 2
/ ωni
2
)
the exact solution involves maximizing a complicated trigonometric expression with many phase angles. The exact
solution can be obtained by expanding the general u(t) expression to include all the modes considered, and only
then maximised.
However, this may prove to be mathematically involved if differentiation is to be performed analytically by hand
(the computerized method of course performs the response calculation at discrete frequency points as it is not just
the maximum that is of interest). An alternative would be to instead of maximising the physical response, maximise
the modal responses and then only superpose the modal responses for the physical response.
1
D i max =
(
2ζ 1 − ζ 2 )
p 0i
ξ i max = D i max (ω)
Ki
This is equivalent to the response spectrum method (only that the procedure is employed on a deterministic loading
function instead of a random function). The square root of sum of squares (SRSS) of the maximum modal
contributions as follows, depicted for a 2 DOF dynamic system.
 u 1 max   (φ11ξ1 max )2 + (φ12 ξ 2 max )2 

 = 
u 2 max   (φ 21ξ1 max )2 + (φ 22 ξ 2 max )2 
Alternatively, the Complete Quadratic Combination (CQC) method is used if the modal natural frequencies are too
close to each other (within about 10 %). This is based on random vibration theory. Of course, the upper limit
combination would be to choose all the eigenvectors to have the maximum modal response at the same time.
Often, we need to ascertain other types of response such as velocity and acceleration.
We know that,
 p 0 i ( ωt -θ) 
{u ( t )} = Re al [Φ ]D(ω) e 
  K 
348
Second Edition
Hence the velocity,
{u&(t )} = Re al [Φ]iωD(ω) p0 e i (ωt-θ) 

  K 
{u&(t )} = −ω[Φ ]D(ω) p0 sin(ωt - θ)

 K 
And the acceleration,
  
u&( t )} = Re al [Φ ]− ω2 D(ω) 0 e i ( ωt -θ) 
p
{&
  K 
 
u&( t )} = −ω2 [Φ ]D(ω) 0 cos(ωt - θ) 
p
{&
 K 
The differentiation of the complex vector representing the displacement is equivalent to multiplying the length of
the vector by ω and turning it ahead by 90 degrees. Multiplying any complex number by imaginary i is equivalent
to a rotation of 90 degrees. Hence the velocity leads the displacement by 90 degrees and the acceleration leads the
velocity by 90 degrees. The magnitude of the velocity is ω times that of the displacement and the magnitude of the
acceleration is ω times that of the velocity. In all cases, it is implicitly understood that it is the real part of the
complex number that represents the physical harmonic motion.
Note that the total response is obtained by multiplying the eigenvectors by their corresponding modal amplitude
factor, which is an indication of the prominence of the mode in the response. It is often the case that lower modes
of vibration will have greater prominence. Hence, only a few of the initial prominent modes need to be evaluated in
the expression. However, an important point to observe is that since the velocity and acceleration total responses in
the time domain are a function of the frequencies and the square of the frequencies respectively on top of the usual
modal amplitude factors, this would mean that the prominence of higher modes become more significant when
velocities and accelerations are computed.
Ideally, the responses in the time domain should be maximised to obtain the maximum response. But if this proves
to be difficult, the modal responses can be maximised and combined using some superposition method such as
SRSS or CQC (effectively a response spectrum analysis on a deterministic loading function). For whatever
response be it the displacement, velocity acceleration or force, the individual modal responses should first be
calculated in terms of time t, then maximised, then only combined for the physical response with some method of
superposition. Do not maximise the modal displacement response and base the other velocity and acceleration
responses on that.
349
Second Edition
A forced response analysis of a shear frame (be it to model a building or water tank) is illustrated in MAPLE 7. All
units in SI.
M
u1 10000cos4.5826t
EI = 560000000
M = 400000
2L EI L=4
M M
u2
EI L
2L EI
System and Frequency Domain Excitation Description - User Input

> restart;
with(LinearAlgebra):
DOF:=2:
EI:=560000000:
M:=400000:
L:=4:
MASS:=Matrix([[M,0],[0,2*M]]);
KE:=Matrix([[3*EI/L^3,-3*EI/L^3],[-3*EI/L^3,9*EI/L^3]]);
MODALDAMPING:=Matrix([[0.01,0],[0,0.01]]);
# Excitation - P(w) is the magnitude of the excitation, i.e. P(t)=Re[P(w)EXP(iwt)]
w:=4.5826:
P(w):=Matrix([[10000],[0]]);
400000 0
MASS :=  
 0 800000

 26250000 -26250000
KE := 
-26250000 78750000
 
.01 0
MODALDAMPING :=  
0 .01

10000
P( 4.5826 ) :=  
 0

Modal Properties of System - Solution of Real Eigenvalue Problem [K-λM]{φ}={0}
- Note that Eigensolution may not arrange the roots sequentially
- MAX normalization of the Eigenvectors
> Eigensolution:=Eigenvectors(MatrixInverse(MASS).KE):
lambda:=Matrix(Eigensolution[1],shape=diagonal):
wn:=map(sqrt,evalf(lambda));
Phi:=Eigensolution[2];
for j from 1 to DOF do
eig:=0:
for i from 1 to DOF do
eig:=eig,Phi[i,j];
end do;
Phi[i,j]:=Phi[i,j]/max(eig);
end do;
end do:
Phi:=Phi;
350
Second Edition
5.728219619 0. 
wn :=  
 0. 11.45643924

 2 -1
Φ := 
 1 1
 
1 -1
 
Φ :=  1 
 1
2 
Uncoupling The Equations of Motion
> MODALMASS:=evalf(Transpose(Phi).MASS.Phi);
MODALSTIFFNESS:=evalf(Transpose(Phi).KE.Phi);
MODALFORCE:=evalf(Transpose(Phi).P(w));
600000. 0. 
MODALMASS :=  
 0. .1200000 10 7
 
8
.19687500 10 0. 
MODALSTIFFNESS :=  
 0. .157500000 109
 10000. 
MODALFORCE := 
-10000.
 
Modal Responses Re[ξi] = Di(w)Poi/Ki cos(wt-θi)
> D(w):=Vector(DOF):
D(w)[i]:=1/((1-w^2/lambda[i,i])^2+(2*MODALDAMPING[i,i]*w/lambda[i,i]^(1/2))^2)^(1/2);
end do;
xi:=Vector(DOF):
xi[i]:=D(w)[i]*MODALFORCE[i,1]/MODALSTIFFNESS[i,i]*cos(w*t-
arctan(2*MODALDAMPING[i,i]*w/lambda[i,i]^(1/2)/(1-w^2/lambda[i,i])));
end do:
xi:=evalf(xi);
D( 4.5826 ) := 2.775090553
1
D( 4.5826 ) := 1.190424609
2
 .001409569805 cos ( 4.5826 t − .04441628701) 

ξ := 
−.00007558251486cos ( 4.5826 t − .009523591344)
 
Physical Response in Time Domain
> u(t):=Vector(DOF):
u(t):=Phi.xi;
 .001409569805 cos ( 4.5826 t − .04441628701) + .00007558251486cos ( 4.5826 t − .009523591344) 

u( t ) := 
.0007047849025cos ( 4.5826 t − .04441628701) − .00007558251486cos ( 4.5826 t − .009523591344)
 
Plot of Response in Time Domain
> variablelegend:=seq(convert(u[i],string),i=1..DOF):
plot([seq(u(t)[i],i=1..DOF)], t=0..10, Displacement,title="Steady-State Displacement
Response", legend=[variablelegend]);
351
Second Edition
An absolutely equivalent method of solving the equations in the frequency domain is to work in real and imaginary
terms instead of in terms of magnitude and phase.
As before, the complex modal response (in modal space) is

p 0i
ξ i (ω) =
− ω M i + iC i ω + K i
2
p 0i
=
− ω M i + K i + iC i ω
2
p 0i / K i
=
(1 − ω 2
)
/ ω ni + i(2ζ i ω / ω ni )
2
Instead of the polar form, this can be written in terms of the real and imaginary parts
ξ i (ω) =
p 0i 

(
1 − ω 2 / ω ni
2
−i
)
(2ζ i ω / ω ni ) 

 (
K i  1 − ω 2 / ω 2 + (2ζ ω / ω )2
ni
2
i ni )1 − ω 2
/ ω ni
2 2
+ (2 ζ i ω(/ ω ni )2 
 )
ξ i (ω) = ξ iREAL (ω) − iξ iIMAG (ω)
{u ( t )} = Re al [[Φ ]{ξ REAL (ω) − iξ IMAG (ω)}e iωt ]

{u ( t )} = Re al [[Φ ]{ξ REAL (ω) − iξ IMAG (ω)}(cosωt + isinωt )]
{u ( t )} = [Φ ]{{ξ REAL (ω)}cos ωt + {ξ IMAG (ω)}sin ωt}
 p 01 
 K (D1REAL (ω) cos ωt + D1IMAG (ω) sin ωt ) 
 1 
 ... 
p 
{u ( t )} = [{φ}1 ... {φ}i ... {φ}n ] 0i (D iREAL (ω) cos ωt + D iIMAG (ω) sin ωt ) 
 iK 
 ... 
 p 0n (D ( ω) cos ω t + D ( ω) sin ωt )
K nREAL nIMAG 
 n 
where
D iREAL (ω) =
(1 − ω / ω ) 2
ni
2
(1 − ω 2
/ ω ) + (2ζ ω / ω
ni
2 2
i ni )2
D iIMAG (ω) =
(2ζ i ω / ω ni )
(1 − ω2 / ωni 2 )2 + (2ζ i ω / ωni )2
This method is very useful because the final expression being in cos and sin means that we can very quickly
find the maximum response (i.e. the steady-state response) as MAX (Acosωt + Bsinωt) = (A2+B2)½. At a
particular DOF j, the steady state response will then be
2 2
 n
p 0i   n
p 0i 
Steady − State Response, u jMAX = 

∑
i Ki
φ ij D iREAL (ω)  + 
 
∑
i Ki
φ ij D iIMAG (ω) 

This procedure is now implemented in the above MAPLE example, showing identical results in the end.
352
Second Edition

> restart;
DOF:=2:
EI:=560000000:
M:=400000:
L:=4:
MASS:=Matrix([[M,0],[0,2*M]]);
MODALDAMPING:=Matrix([[0.01,0],[0,0.01]]);
# Excitation - P(w) is the magnitude of the excitation, i.e. P(t)=Re[P(w)EXP(iwt)]
w:=4.5826:
P(w):=Matrix([[10000],[0]]);
400000 0
MASS :=  
 0 800000
 
 26250000 -26250000
KE := 
-26250000 78750000
 
.01 0 
MODALDAMPING := 
 0 .01
 
10000
P( 4.5826 ) :=  
 0

eig:=0:
eig:=eig,Phi[i,j];
end do;
end do;
end do:
Phi:=Phi;
5.728219619 0. 
wn :=  
 0. 11.45643924
 
2 -1
Φ :=  
1 1

1 -1
 
Φ :=  1 
 1
2 
MODALFORCE:=evalf(Transpose(Phi).P(w));
600000. 0. 
 0. .1200000 107

8
.19687500 10 0. 
MODALSTIFFNESS :=  
9
 0. .157500000 10 

353
Second Edition
 10000. 
MODALFORCE := 
-10000.
 
Modal Responses Re[ξi] = Poi/Ki { DiREAL(w)cos(wt)-DiIMAG(w)sin(wt) }
> DREAL(w):=Vector(DOF):
DIMAG(w):=Vector(DOF):
DREAL(w)[i]:=(1-w^2/lambda[i,i])/((1-
w^2/lambda[i,i])^2+(2*MODALDAMPING[i,i]*w/lambda[i,i]^(1/2))^2);
DIMAG(w)[i]:=(2*MODALDAMPING[i,i]*w/lambda[i,i]^(1/2))/((1-
w^2/lambda[i,i])^2+(2*MODALDAMPING[i,i]*w/lambda[i,i]^(1/2))^2);
end do;
xi:=Vector(DOF):
xi[i]:=MODALFORCE[i,1]/MODALSTIFFNESS[i,i]*(DREAL(w)[i]*cos(w*t)+DIMAG(w)[i]*sin(w*t));
end do:
xi:=evalf(xi);
DREAL( 4.5826 ) := 2.772353645
1
DIMAG( 4.5826 ) := .001344426180 525 16

1
DREAL( 4.5826 ) := 1.190370624

2
DIMAG( 4.5826 ) := .0002473924464 525 4

2
 .001408179629 cos ( 4.5826 t ) + .00006258727349sin( 4.5826 t ) 

ξ :=  
−.00007557908724cos ( 4.5826 t ) − .719806102510-6 sin( 4.5826 t )
 
u(t):=Phi.xi;
 .001483758716 cos ( 4.5826 t ) + .00006330707959sin( 4.5826 t ) 

u( t ) := 
.0006285107273cos ( 4.5826 t ) + .00003057383064sin( 4.5826 t )
 
plot([seq(u(t)[i],i=1..DOF)], t=0..10, Displacement,title="Steady-State Displacement
354
Second Edition
4.4 GL, ML Implicit (Complex) Modal Frequency Response Analysis
SOL 111 performs a modal forced frequency response analysis. It utilizes the real modal properties to decouple the
equations of motion when there is no elemental structural and/or viscous damping within the system. With the
existence of elemental structural and/or viscous, the real modal properties cannot decouple the couple ODEs. In this
case, SOL 111 then performs the forced frequency response analysis using a direct approach on the coupled ODEs,
but in the modal coordinates instead of the physical coordinates. With sufficient modes (sufficient modal
variables), a SOL 111 solution will yield the same answer as a SOL 108 solution. However, the use of the FREQ4
card, which bases the excitation frequencies to be solved for on the real natural frequencies may prove to be
insufficient. This is because with high values of elemental viscous damping, certain local modes can be totally
eliminated. For instance, viscous dampers with high coefficients of damping on cables can considerably alter the
natural frequency of the local mode and even eliminate a local mode altogether. In this case, the FREQ4 card will
not capture the response at the damped natural frequency. Hence, these damped natural frequencies need to be
known (by performing a SOL 107) before choosing the excitation frequencies to be solved for using FREQ2 cards.
If however, a modal approach is still intended with the existence of structural and/or viscous damping, the complex
modal properties must be employed. It is thus necessary to find new orthogonality properties of modes (complex
modes now) in order to be able to diagonalize the matrices. The response analysis is called the complex modal
forced response analysis.
The mathematical formulation of the solution scheme is quite involved. In principle, in order to employ a modal
approach, we need to reduce a set of coupled ODEs to a set of uncoupled ODEs that can be solved independently of
each other. In order to do that, we need to establish orthogonality conditions. A similar procedure employed for
establishing real modal orthogonality conditions can again be utilized to determine the complex modal
orthogonality conditions.
The decision of whether such an involved process is required lies with the degree of complexity of the modes. If
the modes are only slightly complex, then a real modal approach might well be justified. In order to ascertain the
level of complexity of a particular mode, each term within the complex eigenvector is plotted on an Argand
diagram i.e. the imaginary component versus the real component. An almost real mode shape does not necessarily
have vector terms near 0 or 180 degrees. What matters is the relative phase between different terms. A pure real
mode has all its terms in phase which each other. Different modes will of course be out of phase with each other,
but every point in a particular mode will vibrate in phase. And so, for a mode, all points in the structure reach its
maximum and minimum at the same phase instant. A complex mode on the other hand will have different points of
the structure reaching its maximum at different phase instants, i.e. different points of the structure are out of phase
with each other for a particular mode. Of course, different modes are still out of phase with each other. The degree
to which these points are out of phase with each other is a measure of the complexity of the mode. An Argand
diagram with all the terms of the complex eigenvector plotted will exhibit a narrowband if the mode is only slightly
complex. The diagram below shows plots for 4 eigenvector terms. Since there is only a slight phase difference
between the terms (angle between the arrows), the 4 terms define an almost real complex eigenvector.
Im
Re
355
Second Edition
between the terms of the eigenvector and as such a complex modal approach needs to be undertaken if a modal
approach is intended at all. A direct approach is most recommended to avoid the mathematical complexities.
Im
Re
The modal approach in the frequency domain based on real modal properties is first described. This is the approach
used by SOL 111 only when there is no elemental structural or elemental viscous damping.
The coupled system of ODEs of the undamped forced vibration equation of motion is
[M ]{&
u&( t )} + [K ]{u ( t )} = {P( t )}
To solve the equation in the frequency domain, we let
{u ( t )} = Re al [[Φ ]{ξ(ω)}e iωt ]
Hence
−[M ][Φ ]{ξ(ω)}ω 2 e iωt + [K ][Φ ]{ξ(ω)}e iωt = {P(ω)}e iωt
−ω 2 [M ][Φ ]{ξ(ω)} + [K ][Φ ]{ξ(ω)} = {P(ω)}
It can be shown that the orthogonality condition of the normal modes is
{φ i }T [[M ] + [K ]]{φ j }= 0 if i≠ j
Hence, premultiplying by [Φ ] reduces the coupled system of ODEs to a system of uncoupled ODEs
T
−ω 2 [Φ ] [M ][Φ ]{ξ(ω)} + [Φ ] [K ][Φ ]{ξ(ω)} = [Φ ] {P(ω)}

T T T
−ω 2 [M]{ξ(ω)} + [K ]{ξ(ω)} = {P(ω)}

The matrices [M] and [K] are thus diagonal.
The modal approach in the frequency domain based on complex modal properties is now described.
Complex eigenvalue analysis with viscous (and structural optional) damping, for each mode i, NASTRAN outputs,
two complex roots which are a complex conjugate pair, α i + iωdi and α i − iωdi , where
ωdi is positive and represents the damped natural circular frequency
two complex eigenvectors which are a complex conjugate pair, {φ R + iφ I }i and {φ R − iφ I }i
Complex eigenvalue analysis with only structural (and no viscous) damping, for each mode i, NASTRAN outputs,
one complex root, α i + iωdi , where
ωdi is positive and represents the damped natural circular frequency
one complex eigenvector, {φ R + iφ I }i
356
Second Edition
The coupled system of ODEs of the damped forced vibration equation of motion is
[M ]{&
u&( t )} + [C]{u&( t )} + [K ]{u ( t )} = {P( t )}
where [ K ] = (1 + iG )[K ] + i ∑G E [K E ]
It can be shown that the orthogonality conditions with viscous (and structural optional) damping are
{φ R [((α
+ iφ I }i
T
i ( )) ]
+ iω di ) + α j + iω dj [M ] + [C] {φ R + iφ I }j = 0, and
{φ R + iφ } [((α + iω di ) * (α + iω dj ))[M ] − [K ]]{φ + iφ I }j = 0, i≠ j
T
I i j R if
Note that the orthogonality condition with only structural (and no viscous) damping is
{φ R + iφ I }
T
[[M] + [K ]]{φ R + iφ I }j = 0, if i≠ j
Clearly, the orthogonality conditions are far more complicated, making the mathematics defining the complex
modal forced frequency response analysis very difficult. It will not be attempted here.
357
Second Edition
4.5 GL, ML Implicit Direct Frequency Response Analysis
(a) Deterministic periodic harmonic long duration loading functions
A deterministic periodic forcing function has regularly repeating amplitude. The sine or cosine function is said to
be harmonic. Because the periodic function repeats itself, any initial starting transient response is insignificant and
the steady state response is of interest, hence the solution is performed in the frequency domain. The starting
transient normally decays away after 50-100 cycles of oscillation for light damping. The steady-state oscillatory
response occurs at the same frequency as the loading phase shifted due to damping.
This method is not a modal method and so the solution is not a reduced solution and is therefore computationally
very expensive as it involves the full mass, stiffness and damping matrices. For small models this type of solution
is probably better than a modal frequency response analysis and certainly more accurate. However, for large
models it is too inefficient and can only be used to compute response at a handful of frequency locations, where
there is doubt in the modal frequency response results. In general, modal frequency response analysis is used when
(i) the model is large
(ii) many excitation frequencies need to be solved for
On the other hand, direct frequency response analysis is employed when

(i) the model is small
(ii) only a few excitation frequencies need to be solved for
(iii) the response due to high frequency excitation is required, as this requires many modes to be
computed in the modal frequency response analysis, the computation of the modes being the costly
operation in the modal approach
(iv) high accuracy is required as the direct approach does not involve mode truncation.
The coupled system of ODEs of the undamped harmonically forced vibration equation of motion are given by
[M ]{&
u&( t )} + [K ]{u ( t )} = {P( t )}
In the frequency domain, let
{u ( t )} = Re al [{F(ω)}e iωt ] where {F(ω)}is a complex displacement response function vector
{P(t )} = Re al [{P(ω)}e iωt ] where {P(ω)}is a complex forcing function vector
This transformation is worth a little explanation. The harmonic forcing function in the time domain P(t) is
transformed into the frequency domain simply by multiplying
{P( t )} = Re al [{P(ω)}e iωt ]

{P(ω)} is the complex harmonic forcing function. The harmonic term is eiωt. {P(ω)} can be frequency dependent
and/or can even be complex in general. If {P(ω)} is complex, this refers to harmonic loading functions which are
out of phase with respect to each other. We usually assume that {P(ω)} is frequency independent and also just real,
such that {P(ω)} = {p0}. The frequency domain complex forcing function {P(ω)} is specified in NASTRAN with
358
Second Edition
the RLOAD1 and RLOAD2 cards. The harmonic term is inferred naturally. It must be stressed that the specified
frequency domain excitation is the complex harmonic forcing function {P(ω)} and that the corresponding complex
total response vector is {F(ω)}. If {P(ω)} is complex, then {F(ω)} will be complex. If {P(ω)} is only real, then
{F(ω)} will be real if there is no damping in the system but will be complex if there is damping in the system. The
curves for {F(ω)} versus ω is what is produced by the NASTRAN output in a frequency domain analysis. It can be
viewed in its real and imaginary components versus ω, or in its magnitude and phase versus ω, the latter of which is
what should be observed to ascertain the response. To summarize
Frequency domain loading function from the time domain loading function
[
{P( t )} = Re al {P(ω)}e iωt ]
where {P(ω)} is the complex loading function vector
Frequency domain complex total response function vector is
{F(ω)} which is complex in general
Time domain total response from the frequency domain complex total response
[
{u ( t )} = Re al {F(ω)}e iωt ]
Hence on substituti on,
−[M ]{F(ω)}ω 2 e iωt + [K ]{F(ω)}e iωt = {P(ω)}e iωt
[− ω [M] + [K ]]{F(ω)} = {P(ω)}
2
{F(ω)} = {P(ω)}
− ω 2 [M ] + [K ]
This equation is solved at each and every specified discrete forcing frequency ω using complex aritmetic.
Because the terms are vectors and matrices, there is the requirement for simultaneous equation solvers to ascertain
{F(ω)}, this being the reason that the direct approach is far more expensive computationally compared to the modal
approach.
Finally the total response is

{u ( t )} = Re al [{F(ω)}e iωt ]

II. modal damping
i. viscous damping No
ii. structural damping No
ii. stiffness proportional damping Yes
359
Second Edition
With damping, the coupled system of ODEs of the damped harmonically forced vibration equation of motion are given by
[M ]{&
u&( t )} + [C]{u&( t )} + [K ]{u ( t )} = {P( t )}
where
[K ] = (1 + iG )[K ] + i ∑G E [K E ]
[C ] = ∑ [C E]
Hence,
−[M ]{F(ω)}ω 2 e iωt + iω[C]{F(ω)}e iωt + [K ]{F(ω)}e iωt = {P(ω)}e iωt
[− ω [M] + iω[C] + [K ]]{F(ω)} = {P(ω)}
2
{F(ω)} = {P(ω)}
−ω 2
[M] + iω[C] + [K ]
This equation is solved at each and every specified discrete forcing frequency ω using complex arithmetic. Unlike
the modal frequency response analysis, the direct frequency response analysis requires the solution of simultaneous
equations at each forcing frequency, hence explaining its additional cost.
Finally the total response is

{u ( t )} = Re al [{F(ω)}e iωt ]
In direct frequency response analysis, it is not necessary to assume an equivalent viscous form for structural
damping as the solution is complex. Hence the element structural damping coefficient Gelement or G parameters do
not form a damping matrix [C], instead they form a complex stiffness matrix.
The complex response function due to a loading {P(ω)} is defined as
{F(ω)} = {P(ω)}
−ω 2
[M ] + iω[C] + [K ]
The complex transfer function is defined as the complex frequency response function due to unit harmonic
excitations
[H(ω)] = 1
− ω [M ] + iω[C] + [K ]
2
[
{u ( t )} = Re al [H (ω)]{P(ω)}e iωt ]
The (magnitude of the) dynamic amplification function D(ω) is defined as the magnitude of the complex response
The animation of the forced frequency response is quite indicative of the nature of the response of the structure to
harmonic excitations. The forced frequency response analysis will yield for each node, both real and imaginary
responses. The animation of the forced response of the structure as a whole (at any particular frequency of
excitation) is only of value when we plot the magnitude of the response, and not the individual real or imaginary
components. The phase information (which is obtained when the magnitude and argument of the real and
parts of the structure. Explicit viscous dampers will cause parts of the structure to vibrate clearly out-of-phase.
360
Second Edition
4.5.3.1 GL, ML Direct Forced Frequency Response Analysis
SOL 108
$ Grid output of displacement, velocity and acceleration for excitation frequencies
$ SORT1 lists the results by frequency whilst SORT2 lists the results by grid id
VELOCITY(<SORT1/SORT2>,<PRINT,PUNCH,PLOT>,<REAL/PHASE>) = ALL/<Grid Set ID>
ACCELERATION(<SORT1/SORT2>,<PRINT,PUNCH,PLOT>,<REAL/PHASE>) = ALL/<Grid Set ID>
OLOAD(<SORT1/SORT2>,<PRINT,PUNCH,PLOT>,<REAL/PHASE>) = ALL/<Grid Set ID>
$ Grid output of d-set displacement, velocity and acceleration
SDISPLACEMENT(<SORT1/SORT2>,<PRINT,PUNCH>,<REAL/PHASE>) = ALL/<Grid Set ID>
SVELOCITY(<SORT1/SORT2>,<PRINT,PUNCH>,<REAL/PHASE>) = ALL/<Grid Set ID>
SACCELERATION(<SORT1/SORT2>,<PRINT,PUNCH>,<REAL/PHASE>) = ALL/<Grid Set ID>
$ Analysis Cards
FREQ = < ID OF FREQi >
$ XY plot output
OUTPUT(XYPLOT)
$ BULK DATA
Number
FREQ1 ID fstart ∆f
of ∆f
All FREQi entries with the same selected ID, selected by the FREQUENCY entry in the Case Control Section, will
be combined. The FREQ1 bulk data entry selects the frequencies at which the frequency response analysis is
performed. The FREQ and FREQ2 cards can also be used to define points within the regions of resonance
(evaluated by a separate modal analysis prior to the forced response analysis). It is important to specify a fine
enough frequency step size ∆f to adequately predict peak response. Use at least five to ten points across the half-
power bandwidth. For maximum efficiency, an uneven frequency step size should be used. Smaller frequency
spacing should be used in regions near resonant frequencies, and larger frequency step sizes should be used in
regions away from resonant frequencies. Adaptive excitation frequency Bulk Data entries, which depend on the
modal frequencies FREQ3, FREQ4 and FREQ5 cannot be used as the modal frequencies are not calculated in the
direct response analysis. This is one of the drawbacks of the direct method SOL 108 as opposed to the modal
method SOL 112, i.e. it is necessary to spend effort in capturing the peak. SOL 112 does not suffer from this
drawback because the solution set is the modal responses and hence the peak is naturally captured. But in SOL 108,
it is especially difficult to capture peak when the modal damping is low since the peak is very spiky. Again five to
ten points across the half-power bandwidth must be ensured. To check if the peak has been truly captured, a SOL
107 can be used to estimate the modal damping. Then assuming small modal damping the maximum dynamic
361
Second Edition
amplification would be 1/2ζ. Note that the dynamic amplification curve is obtained from the plotted FRF from
NASTRAN by dividing by the static response P/K. It should be okay to use the zero frequency SOL 108 response
to estimate the static response P/K, although this assumes that the frequency is close enough to zero and that there
is little structural damping in the system. There are of course no modal truncation concerns in this direct approach.
The exact estimate of the static response P/K would clearly be to perform a static analysis SOL 101 with a
magnitude equal to the amplitude of the frequency domain (sinusoidal) forcing function.
Printed .f06 frequency response output can be in SORT1 or SORT2 format. In the SORT1 format, the results are
listed by frequency i.e. for each frequency the results of all grid points are given, whilst in the SORT2 format, the
results are listed by grid point i.e. for each grid point the results of all frequencies are given.
To define frequency frozen structural plots,
DISPLACEMENT(PLOT,PHASE)=ALL
$ BULK DATA
PARAM,DDRMM,-1
PARAM,CURVPLOT,1
For each frequency of excitation, the magnitude of the response at each and every point in the structure is animated
with the phase information. It is meaningless and impossible to plot the real and imaginary components, as the
animation requires the phase difference between different points in the structure. It is prudent to limit the
frequencies of excitation so as to limit the amount of output.
362
Second Edition
To define a frequency dependent dynamic excitation, both spatial distribution and the frequency variation (i.e. the
temporal distribution) must be defined. The RLOAD1 entry defines dynamic excitation in real and imaginary
format whilst the RLOAD2 entry defines dynamic excitation in magnitudes and phases. It is important to realize
that P(f) is defined with the right-hand-side of the equation of motion in the frequency domain being Real
[P(f)ei2πft]. Hence P(f) is the complex loading function in the frequency domain.
RLOAD1: {P(f)} = {A[C(f)+iD(f)ei{θ − 2πfτ}]}

RLOAD2: {P(f)} = {AB(f)ei{ φ(f) + θ − 2πfτ}}
Note that C(f) + iD(f) = B(f)ei φ(f)
f = frequency in cycles per unit time

A = amplitude scalar multiplier defined by DAREA for a DOF
τ = time delay in an applied load defined by DELAY for a DOF
θ = phase lead angle in degrees defined by DPHASE for a DOF
C(f) = frequency dependent real coefficient defined by Real TABLED1

D(f) = frequency dependent imaginary coefficient defined by Imaginary TABLED1
B(f) = frequency dependent amplitude curve defined by Amplitude TABLED1

φ(f) = frequency dependent phase angles curve in degrees defined by Phase TABLED1
$ BULK DATA
Real Imaginary
DAREA
RLOAD1 ID DELAY ID DPHASE ID TABLED1 TABLED1
ID
ID ID
Amplitude Phase
DAREA
RLOAD2 ID DELAY ID DPHASE ID TABLED1 TABLED1
ID
ID ID
Component Scale Component Scale

DAREA ID GRID ID GRID ID
Number Factor Number Factor
Component Time Component Time

DELAY ID GRID ID GRID ID
Number Delay τ Number Delay τ
Phase Phase
Component Component
DPHASE ID GRID ID
Number Lead θ GRID ID
Number Lead θ
(degrees) (degrees)
TABLED1 ID XAXIS YAXIS
x1 y1 x2 y2 x3 y3 x4 Y4
x5 y5 x6 y6 … … ENDT
363
Second Edition
Any number of DAREA, DELAY and DPHASE entries may be defined. All those with the same ID will be
subjected to the dynamic excitation definition of Real/Amplitude TABLED1 and Imaginary/Phase TABLED1 as
defined within the same RLOAD1/RLOAD2 entry. The XAXIS and YAXIS in the TABLED1 entry refers to either
LINEAR or LOG interpolation between and beyond the extremities of the specified {xi , yi} pairs of {frequency,
amplitude} or {frequency, phase angles}. Note that the frequencies are specified in cycles per unit time and the
phase angles are specified in degrees.
In order to verify the applied loading, the response at 0.0 Hz without structural damping should be checked to
match the results from a static analysis, the discrepancy arising from mode truncation.
It must be understood that use of complex numbers is only to ease mathematical manipulation. The harmonic
excitation is understood to consist only of the real component of the complex number and likewise with the
response. At a component of a DOF,
[ ]
P( t ) = Re al P(ω)e iωt where P(ω) is complex
= Re al[A (C + iDe ( i θ −ωτ )
)e ]
iωt
If we required a simple P(t) = 1.0sinωt loading function,

Let A = 1.0, D = −1.0 and all else zero, so that
[(
P( t ) = Re al 1 0 − i1e i (0−ω0 ) e iωt ) ]
= Re al[− ie ] iωt
= Re al[− i(cos ωt + i sin ωt )]

= Re al[− i cos ωt + sin ωt ]
= sin ωt
If we required a simple P(t) = 1.0cosωt loading function,
Let A = 1.0, C = 1.0 and all else zero, so that
[( ) ]
P( t ) = Re al 1 1 − i0e i (0−ω0 ) e iωt
= Re al[1e ] iωt
= Re al[1(cos ωt + i sin ωt )]
= Re al[cos ωt + i sin ωt ]
= cos ωt
If we require P(t) = 1.0sinωt + 1.0cosωt,
Let A = 1.0, C = 1.0, D = −1.0 and all else zero, so that

[( ) ]
P( t ) = Re al 1 1 − i1e i (0−ω0 ) e iωt
= Re al[1(1 − i )e ] iωt
= Re al[(1 − i )(cos ωt + i sin ωt )]

= Re al[cos ωt + i sin ωt − i cos ωt + sin ωt ]
= sin ωt + cos ωt
364
Second Edition
Notice that cosωt is basically 90 degrees out of phase with sinωt. If we require a function which is out of phase by
α, for instance P(t) = 1.0sin(ωt+α),
Let A = 1.0, D = −1.0, θ = α and all else zero, so that
[( ) ]
P( t ) = Re al 1 0 − i1e i (α −ω0 ) e iωt
= Re al[− ie ( i ωt +α )
]
= Re al[− i(cos(ωt + α ) + i sin (ωt + α ))]
= Re al[− i cos(ωt + α ) + sin (ωt + α )]
= sin (ωt + α )
Likewise, the steady-state response should be interpreted.
[
u ( t ) = Re al F(ω)e iωt ] where F(ω) is complex
 p  
= Re al  D(ω) 0 e −iθ e iωt 
 k  
 p 
= Re al D(ω) 0 e i (ωt −θ ) 
 k 
 p 
= Re al D(ω) 0 (cos(ωt − θ ) + i sin (ωt − θ))
 k 
p
= D(ω) 0 cos(ωt − θ)
k
It is suggested that the P(ω) be inputted in Complex Cartesian format (i.e. RLOAD1) and that the response u(t) be
interpreted in Complex Polar format. Remember that it is P(ω) that is inputted in RLOAD1 (and not P(t)) and that it
is F(ω) which is outputted by NASTRAN in terms of preferably magnitude and phase. The NASTRAN output is
p
Magnitude = D(ω) 0 and Phase = θ
k
Note that D(ω) is the (magnitude of the) dynamic amplification factor. F(ω) can of course still be outputted in real
and imaginary components if desired, but it is far more indicative if it is outputted in terms of magnitude and phase.
All instances of phase refer to the clockwise angle from the real axis in the complex plane. Hence, we can make the
following conclusions from the steady-state harmonic analysis,
(i) if P(ω) is only positive real such that P(t) = 1.0cosωt, then the response will be
p
u ( t ) = D(ω) 0 cos(ωt − θ)
k
which means that the response lags the loading by θ. There will be a phase lag if and only if there
is damping within the system.
(ii) if P(ω) is only negative imaginary such that P(t) = 1.0sinωt, then the response will be
p
u ( t ) = D(ω) 0 sin (ωt − θ)
k
which means that the response again lags the loading by θ. There will be a phase lag if and only if
there is damping within the system.
(iii) if P(ω) is both real and imaginary, such that P(t) = 1.0sinωt + 1.0cosωt, then the response will be
u ( t ) = D(ω) 0 [sin(ωt − θ) + cos(ωt − θ)]
p
k
which means that the response again lags the loading by θ. There will be a phase lag if and only if
there is damping within the system.
Thus, it can be concluded that there will only be a phase lag in the response if there is damping within the system.
365
Second Edition
Defining the spatial distribution using DAREA only enables the specification of dynamic concentrated forces and
moments. To accommodate more complicated loadings, the LSEQ entry is used to refer to static load entries that
define the spatial distribution of the dynamic loads.

LOADSET = < ID OF LSEQ >
DLOAD = < ID OF RLOAD1/RLOAD2 >
$ BULK DATA
DAREA
Static Temp
LSEQ ID Reference
Load ID Load ID
Link
DAREA Real Imaginary
RLOAD1 ID Reference DELAY ID DPHASE ID TABLED1 TABLED1
Link ID ID
DAREA Amplitude Phase
RLOAD2 ID Reference DELAY ID DPHASE ID TABLED1 TABLED1
Link ID ID
The DAREA Reference Link links the RLOAD1/RLOAD2 entry to the LSEQ which can now be used to refer to
static load set ids which define the spatial distribution of the dynamic loads. The static load set id can refer to one
or more static load entry types. Obviously, there is not a DAREA entry anymore. It is replaced by an LSEQ bulk
data entry, a LOADSET case control entry and the pertinent bulk data static load entries such as FORCE, PLOADi
or GRAV.
A new automatic feature will be activated if and only if the user does not have a LOADSET/LSEQ selection. With
the new enhancement, it is no longer necessary for the user to explicitly specify LOADSET/LSEQ combination in
order to employ static loading data in dynamic analysis. Instead, when the user selects a dynamic load, all static
loads and thermal loads that have the same ID as the DAREA ID on the dynamic load entry are automatically
selected.
The frequency dependent load card RLOAD1/RLOAD2 is selected using the DLOAD case control command. If
more than one RLOAD1/RLOAD2 entry is required, then a dynamic load set combination is required. This is done
using a DLOAD bulk data entry that linearly combines multiple RLOAD1/RLOAD2 entries.

DLOAD = < ID OF DLOAD >
$ BULK DATA
Overall
Scale RLOAD1 / Scale RLOAD1 /
DLOAD ID Scale ..etc..
Factor RLOAD2 ID Factor RLOAD2 ID
Factor
366
Second Edition
Four methods can be used for enforced motion, namely: -

(i) The direct absolute response approach
(ii) The direct relative response approach
(iii) The indirect large mass method (absolute response approach)
(iv) The indirect large spring method (absolute response approach)
The direct absolute response approach makes no assumptions. The direct relative response approach makes the
following assumptions 3: -
(i) base movements in any given direction are identical i.e. that the base supports cannot move
independently
(ii) no mass or damping coupling between the structure and the ground (the off diagonal terms in the
unsupported mass matrix that couple the structure and the ground movements are zero or are
insignificant)
(ii) no damping into the ground
In both the direct absolute and direct relative approaches, the equation of motion is the same on the LHS, hence the
same resonant frequencies and mode shapes are obtained, only the applied loading vector on the RHS differ. The
two approaches will also give the same stresses within the elements. With the assumption of no coupling of mass
and damping, the absolute response is found by applying a base displacement and the relative response by applying
a base displacement. The absolute displacement response and relative displacement response only differ by a rigid
body movement.
4.5.3.1.2.1 Direct Enforced Motion (Absolute Response Approach)
The direct approach of applying enforced motion is the most accurate method. Denoting the free DOFs as f and the
constrained DOFs (whether with enforced motion or zero constraints) as s, P the force and q the reaction, the
dynamic equilibrium equation can be partitioned as
With zero constraints, i.e.
the dynamic equation of motion reduces to the usual
with the corresponding reactions
But, with enforced motion, the dynamic equation of motion is

3
NAFEMS. A Finite Element Primer. NAFEMS Ltd., Great Britain, 1992.
367
Second Edition
Hence, in general the user specifies the either the support displacement, velocity or acceleration, as all three
motions are related to each other in the sense that the velocity is the first derivative and the acceleration is the
second derivative of the displacement.
But for most structural problems, the damping component Bsf (not Bss in the reaction expression) can be ignored
and for lumped mass formulations (or at least no coupling to the support freedoms), Msf is zero, hence reducing the
equivalent forcing function to
Pf(t) – Kfs us(t)
and hence, only the base displacement excitation needs to be incorporated. However, these approximations need
not necessarily be employed in which case the absolute approach has no inherent assumptions. Note that the
response will be obtained in absolute terms. This solution method is general and is valid even if different supports
are moving with different independent excitations.
4.5.3.1.2.2 Direct Enforced Motion (Relative Response Approach)
Described for the time domain in the direct transient response section.
The DLOAD Case Control Command, optionally the DLOAD bulk data entry, RLOAD1/RLOAD2, DELAY,
DPHASE and TABLED1 is used in the same way as they were when load excitations were applied. One difference
is the TYPE Field 8 of RLOAD1/RLOAD2 where enforced motion in terms of DISP, VELO or ACCE is specified.
Another difference for the direct enforced motion lies in the EXCITEID Field 3 of RLOAD1/RLOAD2, where
instead of referencing a DAREA card (hence not requiring a DAREA card at all for enforced motion), the
EXCITEID Field references an SPCD entry, which in turn will reference a GRID ID and an associated DOF
component in which the enforced motion is to be applied. Now at the same time, in line with methods of applying
enforced motion in static analysis, the DOF component of the GRID ID with enforced motion must be constrained
with an SPC bulk data entry which of course must be referenced by an SPC Case Control Command. Modal
augmentation vectors by PARAM, RESVEC, YES must be used for modal methods. This is because since there no
rigid body modes (as they are constrained by the enforced motion), there can be no motion of the enforced points
unless RESVEC is used.
368
Second Edition
4.5.3.1.2.3 Indirect Large Mass Method (Absolute Response Approach) – Base Acceleration Specified
If a very large mass m0, which is several orders of magnitude larger than the mass of the entire structure, is
connected to a DOF where a dynamic load is applied, then the acceleration of the DOF is approximately
P(t )
&
u&( t ) =
m0
Hence, the (large) force required to produce the desired acceleration at the DOF is
P( t ) = m 0 &
u&( t )
The stiffness, damping and the inertial force of the mass of the structure at the DOF contributes little in comparison
to the force provided by the large mass, hence the acceleration response is due primarily to the inertial force of the
large mass. The larger the mass in comparison, the more accurate the acceleration excitation. However the
magnitude is limited by numeric overflow in the computer. MSC recommends that the value of m0 be
approximately 106 times the mass of the entire structure for an enforced translational DOF and 106 times the mass
moment of inertia of the entire structure for a rotational DOF (for 6 digits of numerical accuracy). The
disadvantage of the large mass method is that it involves a loss of numerical conditioning and hence a loss of
accuracy of the response. If the large mass is 106 times the mass of the structure, this is equivalent to losing 6
significant figures in the definition of the mass and stiffness matrices.
The following procedure is employed to specify prescribed motion in forced frequency response analysis: -
(i) remove constraints from the enforced DOFs
(ii) place large masses or inertia scalar elements CMASSi or CONMi with values approximately 106 times
the mass or mass moment of inertia of the entire structure
(iii) if a sinusoidal displacement motion is to be prescribed
Prescribed displacement u ( t ) = B sin( 2πft )
Hence, prescribed acceleration &
u&( t ) = − B4π 2 f 2 sin(2πft )
Hence, load with large mass method P(t) = P(f) sin( 2πft )
= − m 0 B4π 2 f 2 sin( 2πft )
Hence, P(f) = − m 0 B4π 2 f 2
Clearly, if a sinusoidal (of amplitude B) velocity or acceleration was to be prescribed the amplitude of
the force P(f) would simply be m0B2πf or m0B respectively.
The scale factor A=Bm0 can be entered in the DAREA entry. The factors –4π2f2 and 2πf are frequency-dependent
factors which has to be entered using the TABLED4 entry, illustrated for the former as follows,
TABLED4 ID X1=0.0 X2=1.0 X3=0.0 X4=10000.0
A0=0.0 A1=0.0 A2=−4π2 A3 A4 A5 … etc … ENDT
The TABLED4 entry has the following algorithm,

i
 x − X1 
N
y= ∑
i =0
Ai 
 X2 

In this case,
2
 x − 0 .0 
y = −4 π 2  
 1 .0 
369
Second Edition
Only the coefficient A2 is of a non-zero value to generate a frequency dependent coefficient to the second degree.
Likewise a prescribed sinusoidal velocity will have a frequency dependency to the first degree and a prescribed
sinusoidal acceleration will not have a frequency dependency. Note that when x < X3, x = X3 and when x > X4, x
= X4. This has the effect of placing bounds on the table, there is no extrapolation outside the table boundaries.
ENDT ends the table input.
The DLOAD Case Control Command, optionally the DLOAD bulk data entry, RLOAD1/RLOAD2, DAREA,
DELAY, DPHASE and TABLED1 is used in the same way as they were when load excitations were applied.
To ensure that the chosen mass values are high enough two modal analyses (SOL 103) should be run, one with the
enforced DOFs constrained and the other with the large masses attached and the DOFs left unconstrained. The
flexible frequencies (not the rigid mode frequencies) between the two analyses should be well comparable (to
within 4 or 5 significant figures), otherwise the mass values should be increased.
In modal methods, further considerations must be made to the rigid body modes. Globally unconstrained structures
will have rigid body modes. Releasing a global DOF and placing a large mass there to enforce an applied motion
will result in that DOF being unconstrained and hence will result in a rigid body mode (stress free mode). This
mode can safely be discarded in the solution by using LFREQ or simply not calculating it in EIGRL. If however
two large masses are placed at two different locations to simulate enforced motion in the same direction, there will
be a further low-frequency mode that represents the motion of one large mass relative to the other. This mode does
contribute to the stresses are cannot be ignored. It must be captured within EIGRL and LFREQ. To avoid this
problem, a solution will be to place only one large mass at an arbitrary location and connect with RBE2 elements
all DOFs that are to be subjected to that enforced motion.
4.5.3.1.2.4 Indirect Large Spring Method (Absolute Response Approach) – Base Displacement Specified
Described for the time domain in the direct transient response section.
370
Second Edition
4.5.3.2 GL, ML P-∆ (KGA From KEA) Direct Forced Frequency Response Analysis
Phase 1
Phase 2
(KGA From KEA) response to the dynamic excitation.

SUBCASE 1
SUBCASE 2
LABEL = P-∆ Direct Frequency Response Analysis
371
Second Edition
for frequency response analysis, because the static responses contribute only to the zero frequency response.
372
Second Edition
4.5.3.3 GL, ML P-∆ (KGA From Exact or Approximate KTA) Direct Forced Frequency Response Analysis
Phase 1
Phase 2
Phase 3
Phase 4
Approximate KTA) response to the dynamic excitation.
373
Second Edition
4.5.4.1 The Theory of the Dynamic Magnification Factor for Undamped Motion and Hence the
Determination of Maximum Dynamic Displacement, umax for Deterministic Harmonic Loading by
Classically Solving the SDOF Linear Undamped ODE and Maximizing the Solution
Equation of motion
[
u&( t ) + ku ( t ) = Re al p 0 e iωt
m& ]
Assume solution
u(t) = u c (t) + u p ( t )
For homogenous part,
m&u&c ( t ) + ku c ( t ) = 0
[ ]
assume u c (t) = Re al Ge λt where G = G R + iG I and λ = α + iωd
2 λt λt
mGλ e + kGe = 0
(mλ
+ k Ge λt = 0
2
)
(mλ 2
+k =0 ) as Ge λt > 0
k k
λ1 = +i λ 2 = −i
m m
k
∴α = 0 and ωd = ω n = rad / s
m
[
u c (t) = Re al G 1e λ1t + G 2 e λ 2 t ]
u c (t) = Re al [(G 1R + iG 1I )(cos ωn t + i sin ω n t ) + (G 2 R + iG 2 I )(cos ωn t − i sin ω n t )]
u c ( t ) = Re al [((G1R + G 2 R )cos ω n t − (G1I − G 2 I )sin ωn t ) + i((G 1I + G 2 I ) cos ω n t + (G1R − G 2 R )sin ωn t )]
G 1I = −G 2 I and G 1R = G 2 R
hence
u c ( t ) = 2G R cos ω n t − 2G I sin ωn t
For the inhomogenous part,
[ ]
assume u p ( t ) = Re al F(ω)e iωt , hence on substituti on,
− mω F(ω) + kF(ω) = p 0
2
p0 p0 / k
F(ω) = =
k − mω 2 1 − (ω / ω n ) 2
thus
[
u p ( t ) = Re al F(ω)e iωt = ] p0 / k
1 − (ω / ω n ) 2
cos ωt
374
Second Edition
Hence, the general solution is

p0 / k
u ( t ) = 2G R cos ω n t − 2G I sin ω n t + cos ωt
1 − (ω / ω n ) 2
u&(0) ωp 0 / k
where 2G R = − −2G I = u (0)
ωn ( )
1 − ω 2 / ω 2n ω n
and
Notice that the initial conditions were obtained from the general solution, and not from considering the
complementary function alone.
Investigating the frequency of the response, the starting transient solution uc(t) is at the frequency and is in phase
with the structure’s ωn, whilst the steady-state solution up(t) is at the frequency and is in phase with the loading’s ω.
Since there is no damping, there is no imaginary component in the complex response function F(ω).
Investigating the amplitude of the response, the steady-state solution has a static displacement amplitude p0/k
scaled by the (magnitude of the) dynamic amplification factor 1/(1−ω2/ωn2). Hence, the (magnitude of the) dynamic
amplification factor D(ω) increases as ω/ωn approaches unity, and resonance occurs. With no damping, the
maximum (magnitude of the) dynamic amplification occurs exactly when ω = ωn.
375
Second Edition
4.5.4.2 The Theory of the Dynamic Magnification Factor for Damped Motion and Hence Determination of
Maximum Dynamic Displacement, umax for Deterministic Harmonic Loading by Classically Solving
the SDOF Linear Damped ODE and Maximizing the Solution
Equation of motion m&

u&( t )
m&
u&( t ) + cu&( t ) + ku ( t ) = Re al p 0 e [ iωt
] ku(t)
p0eiwt
Assume solution
m
u(t) = u c (t) + u p ( t ) u(t)
For homogenous part,
m&u&c ( t ) + cu&c ( t ) + ku c ( t ) = 0 cu&( t )
[ ]
assume u c (t) = Re al Ge λt where G = G R + iG I and λ = α + iωd
mGλ e + cGλe + kGe λt = 0
2 λt λt
(mλ
+ cλ + k Ge λt = 0
2
)
(mλ 2
+ cλ + k = 0 ) as Ge λt > 0
2 2
c  c  k c  c  k
λ1 = − +   − λ2 = − −   −
2m  2 m  m 2m  2 m  m
[
u c (t) = Re al G 1e λ1t + G 2 e λ 2t ]
in the under - damped case, c < c cr , the roots are complex conjugates,
2 2
c k  c  c k  c 
λ1 = − +i −  λ2 = − −i − 
2m m  2m  2m m  2m 
employing Euler's equations,
e iθ = cos θ + i sin θ
e −iθ = cos θ − i sin θ
2
k  c 
hence, writing ωd = − 
m  2m 
 −
c
−
c

u c ( t ) = Re al (G 1R + iG 1I )e 2m (cos ωd t + i sin ωd t ) + (G 2 R + iG 2 I )e 2 m (cos ωd t − i sin ωd t )
t t
 
 −ct 
u c ( t ) = Re al e 2 m [((G 1R + G 2 R )cos ωd t − (G 1I − G 2 I )sin ωd t ) + i((G 1I + G 2 I )cos ωd t + (G 1R − G 2 R )sin ωd t )]
 
G 1I = −G 2 I and G 1R = G 2 R
hence
c
−
[(2G R cos ωd t − 2G I sin ωd t )]
t
u c (t) = e 2m
376
Second Edition
defining the damping ratio ζ such that

c = ζc cr = ζ 2 km = ζ 2mω n
the damped natural circular frequency,
2
ωd =
k  ζ 2 km 
−
m  2m 
=
k ζ 2k
−
m m
=
k
m
( )
1 − ζ 2 = ωn 1 − ζ 2
hence, the complementary function

u c ( t ) = e −ζωn t [(2G R cos ωd t − 2G I sin ωd t )]
where ωd = ω n 1 − ζ 2 and 2G R , − 2G I being the constants of integration from the initial conditions.
For the inhomogeno us part,
[ ]
assume u p ( t ) = Re al F(ω)e iωt , hence on substituti on,
-mω 2 F(ω) + icωF(ω) + kF(ω) = p 0
p0
F(ω) =
k − mω 2 + icω
from complex number theory
x + iy =  x 2 + y 2 e iθ , θ = tan −1 ( y / x )
 
changing the denominato r to a polar complex form
p0 cω 2ζω / ω n
F(ω) = , θ = tan −1 = tan −1
(k − mω ) 2 2
+ (cω)2 e iθ k − mω 2
(
1 − ω2 / ωn
2
)
p0 / k 2ζω / ω n
F(ω) = e −iθ , θ = tan −1
(1 − ω 2
/ ωn )
2 2
+ (2ζω / ω n )
2 (1 − ω 2
/ ωn 2 )
thus,
[
u p ( t ) = Re al F(ω)e iωt ]
p0 / k
u p (t) = cos(ωt − θ)
(1 − ω 2
/ ωn )
2 2
+ (2ζω / ω n )
2
Hence the general solution,
u ( t ) = e −ζωn t [(2G R cos ω d t − 2G I sin ω d t )] +

p0 / k
cos(ωt − θ)
(1 − ω 2 ω 2n ) 2 + ( 2ζω / ω n ) 2
2ζω / ω n
where ω d = ω n 1 − ζ 2 , θ = tan −1
(1 − ω 2 ω 2n )
The starting transient is insignificant because the term e−ζωnt will cause it to vanish. Investigating the frequency of
the response, the insignificant starting transient is at the damped natural frequency of the structure, ωd = ωn(1-ζ2)1/2
and the steady-state solution is at the frequency of but out of phase with the loading’s ω by θ. The complex
response function F(ω) may contain both real and imaginary components depending on the complex loading
function P(ω) and the existence of damping within the system, i.e.
(i) If P(ω) is real and there is no damping within the system, F(ω) is real
(ii) If P(ω) is complex and there is no damping within the system, F(ω) is complex
(iii) If P(ω) is real and there is damping within the system, F(ω) is complex
(iv) If P(ω) is complex and there is damping within the system, F(ω) is complex
377
Second Edition
The complex expression for F(ω) is often expressed in magnitude and phase θ. If P(ω) is only real, the value of the
phase angle θ gives an indication of the damping inherent within the system.
Recapping basic complex number theory,

a complex number contains real and imaginary components
z = x + iy
it can be written in a polar form by computing the magnitude and the phase
z =  x 2 + y 2 e iθ , θ = tan −1 ( y / x )
 
z =  x 2 + y 2 (cos θ + i sin θ), θ = tan −1 ( y / x )
 
The Cartesian form is visualized on a Cartesian diagram of real x- and imaginary y-axes. The polar form is
visualized on the same Cartesian diagram with the magnitude being the radius from the origin and the phase being
the angle of the radius from the real x-axis. It is implicitly understood that when a complex vector is used to
represent a harmonic motion, it is the horizontal projection of the complex vector (i.e. the real component) that
represents the motion.
Investigating the amplitude of the response, the steady-state solution has a static displacement amplitude p0/k
scaled by the (magnitude of the) dynamic amplification factor, D(ω).
1
D(ω) =
(1 − ω 2
/ ωn )
2 2
+ (2ζω / ω n )
2
The following cases are identified: -
(i) If ω/ωn << 1 (very low frequency loading), the (magnitude of the) dynamic amplification D(ω)
approaches 1, stiffness forces dominate and static solution obtained with the displacement response in
phase with loading. Performing a frequency response analysis at a frequency of 0.0 Hertz gives the same
results as a static analysis. The phase angle θ approaches 0°.
(ii) When ω = ωn, the (magnitude of the) dynamic amplification factor D = 1/(2ζ). Resonance by definition
occurs. Stiffness and inertial forces cancel each other and applied force is balanced by damping (hence the
greater the damping, the smaller the response). Although the maximum amplification is not at its greatest,
it is close enough to the maximum for even moderate amounts of damping. The phase angle θ is 90°.
(iii) If ω/ωn = (1-2ζ2)1/2 (note how this is slightly different from ωd = ωn(1-ζ2)1/2 meaning which the
maximum amplification does not actually occur exactly when the forcing frequency equals the damped
natural frequency, never mind the undamped natural frequency, ωn), the maximum (magnitude of the)
dynamic amplification occurs. D = 1/(2ζ(1−ζ2)0.5).
(iv) If ω/ωn >> 1 (very high frequency loading), the (magnitude of the) dynamic amplification D(ω)
approaches 0, inertial forces dominate and no displacement obtained, i.e. loading is changing too fast for
the structure to respond. The displacement response will be 180° out of phase with loading (i.e.
displacement response will have opposite sign to loading force).
Hence, the increase in maximum response for a dynamic analysis compared to a static analysis comes from the
(magnitude of the) dynamic amplification factor, which is a function of the forcing amplitude and the ratio between
the forcing frequencies and the natural frequencies. If the structure is excited close to a resonance, then the stiffness
force (potential or strain energy) and the inertia forces (kinetic energy) cancel out and the response amplitude is
greater in order to maintain equilibrium. The amplitude of vibration is then controlled by the level of damping. The
external forces are balanced by the damping forces. The frequencies at which resonance occurs, that is when the
stiffness and the inertia forces cancel are called the natural frequencies of the system. This is evident from the
eigenvalue problem [K]{φ} = ω2[M]{φ} where frequencies are found such that the inertia and stiffness forces
cancel. It is the frequencies at which a free undamped system will vibrate if disturbed from equilibrium. Damping
378
Second Edition
causes the peak amplitude to occur at a slightly lower frequency so that the damped resonant frequency is slightly
lower than the undamped natural frequency, but since typical structures are under-damped this change is so small it
can be neglected. If the system is excited at some frequency other than resonance, then the amplitude of the
response is largely controlled by the stiffness and inertia forces. In this case, they do not cancel each other and so
the damping force is generally not as significant.
When damping is not considered, the maximum (magnitude of the) dynamic amplification occurs at resonance
when the forcing frequency, ω exactly matches the natural circular frequency, ωn. In that case, the amplification is
infinite. This is not the case when damping is considered, i.e. maximum (magnitude of the) dynamic amplification
does not occur exactly at resonance when the forcing frequency, ω matches the natural circular frequency, ωn or
when ω matches the damped natural circular frequency, ωd = ωn(1-ζ2)1/2 for that matter, instead the maximum
(magnitude of the) dynamic amplification occurs when ω = ωn(1-2ζ2)1/2.
Variation of D with Frequency Ratio For Variation of Phase Angle with Frequency
Different Damping Ratio For Different Damping
Dynamic Amplification Factor,
6 200
5 zhi=0 zhi=0
150
Phase Angle
4 zhi=0.1 zhi=0.1
3 zhi=0.2 100 zhi=0.2

D
zhi=1 zhi=1
2
zhi=2 50 zhi=2
1
0 0
0 1 2 0 1 2
Frequency Ratio ω/ωn
ω/ω Frequency Ratio ω/ωn
ω/ω
The shape of the (magnitude of the) dynamic amplification factor D(ω) versus frequency ratio ω/ωn depends on the
level of damping, as of course does the maximum (magnitude of the) dynamic amplification.
Dmax ≈ Dresonant = 1/(2ζ).

D
Dresonant /√2
ω
(ω/ωn)1
(ω/ωn)2
0
ωn
Measuring the bandwidth at 1/√2 of peak resonant amplitude for convenience, we can write for when
1 1
D resonant =
2 2ζ
1 1 1
=
(1 − ω ω n ) + ( 2ζω / ω n )
2 2 2 2 2 2ζ
379
Second Edition
Squaring both sides and solving for the frequency ratio,
( ω / ω n ) 2 = 1 − 2 ζ 2 ± 2ζ 1 + ζ 2
Ignoring higher order terms of ζ2, hence the assumption that this final equation is valid for only small damping ζ,
( ω / ω n ) 2 = 1 − 2 ζ 2 ± 2ζ
∴ (ω / ω n )12 = 1 − 2ζ 2 + 2ζ (ω / ω n ) 22 = 1 − 2ζ 2 − 2ζ
∴ (ω / ω n ) 1 = 1 + ζ − ζ 2 (ω / ω n ) 2 = 1 − ζ − ζ 2
Finally, subtracting one root from each other
(ω / ω n ) 2 − (ω / ω n )1 ω 2 − ω1 f 2 − f 1
ζ= = =
2 2ω n 2f n
Remember that only when damping is small that the maximum (magnitude of the) dynamic amplification can be
approximated to occur at resonance, by definition when the forcing frequency equals the undamped natural
frequency. When damping is high, it is imperative that the (magnitude of the) dynamic amplification expression be
differentiated or use is made of ωd = ωn(1-2ζ2)1/2 as the point at which the maximum (magnitude of the) dynamic
amplification occurs.
380
Second Edition
4.5.4.3 The Theory of Vibration (Base) Isolation and the Force Transmitted Into Rigid Foundation by the
Damped Structure Subjected to Deterministic Harmonic Loading
Knowing the displacement response of a linear damped SDOF system subjected to deterministic harmonic loading
also means that we can derive the velocity response. This means that we can evaluate the force transmitted through
the spring-damper system. Considering the steady-state response due to a harmonic excitation of p0sinωt,
u ( t ) = D (ω) p 0 / k sin (ω t − θ )
where
1 2ζω / ω n
D(ω) = and θ = tan −1
(1 − ω 2
ω 2n ) 2 + ( 2ζω / ω n ) 2 (1 − ω 2 ω 2n )
Hence the force in the spring - damper system
Force ( t ) = ku ( t ) + cu&( t )
= D(ω) p 0 / k (k sin (ω t − θ ) + cω cos (ωt − θ ))
= D(ω) p 0 / k k 2 + c 2 ω 2 sin (ω t − θ + β ) where tan β = cω /k = 2ζω / ω n
= D(ω) p 0 1 + (2ζω / ω n ) sin (ωt − θ + β ) where tan β = cω /k = 2ζω / ω n
Now, we define an expression for the relative transmissibility as the force response amplitude divided by the
amplitude of the enforcing harmonic force,
Force Response Amplitude
Tr =
p0
Dp 0 1 + (2ζω / ω n )2
=
p0
1 + (2ζω / ω n )
2
=
(1 − ω 2 ω 2n ) 2 + ( 2ζω / ω n ) 2
This is the force transmissibility expression. It will be shown that this expression can also represent the
displacement and acceleration transmissibility’s. This expression of force transmissibility is useful to calculate the
force in the spring-damper system due to both stiffness and viscous damping. This can be used to calculate the
force induced into a foundation by a vibrating structure. For instance, we can evaluate the force induced by a
rotating machine into the supporting structure. And hence, we can design the supporting system of the rotation
machine such that it induces the least amount of vibrations into the supporting structure (and hence the rigid
foundation). The concepts behind vibration isolation (i.e. by investigating the transmissibility expression) is the
same whether we are investigating
(i) the force transmitted into the supporting structure (and hence the rigid foundation) due to a
component subjected to harmonic force, or
(ii) the displacement and acceleration response of a component subjected to harmonic displacement or
acceleration at the rigid foundation
On investigating the transmissibility expression, we can design the supporting system for vibration isolation. The
transmissibility is unity when the supporting system is infinitely stiff with respect to the loading frequency. The
transmissibility is also unity when the frequency ratio is √2. If the supporting system is designed such that the
frequency ratio is less than √2 but greater than 0, the transmissibility is greater than one, which means that the
supporting system actually makes matters worse as far as vibration isolation is concerned. When the frequency
ratio is greater than √2, it is seen that the transmissibility is smaller than unity and hence, the supporting system
381
Second Edition
functions as a vibration isolator. Damping is seen to be advantages only in the region when the frequency ratio is
less than √2 (where a spring mounting supporting system makes matters worse) and not when the frequency ratio is
greater than √2 (where a spring mounting supporting system acts as an effective vibration isolator). This is not so
important actually as the undesirable effects of high values of damping at frequency ratios greater than √2 is not so
great especially at even higher frequency ratios, i.e. achieved by making the supporting system even more flexible.
Also, in the unfortunate circumstance that the resonance region of frequency ratio less than √2 is somehow
attained; high levels of damping are extremely effective. For good isolation, it is often recommended to design the
supporting system for a frequency ratio of at least 3.
Note that the above force transmissibility expression is only valid if the foundation is rigid. If the foundation is not
rigid, then the supporting system must be even more flexible in order to provide the same level of protection as
when the foundation is rigid.
382
Second Edition
4.5.4.4 The Theory of Vibration (Base) Isolation and the Determination of Maximum Dynamic
Displacement, umax for Deterministic Harmonic Support Motion (Displacement, Velocity or
Acceleration) by Classically Solving the SDOF Linear Damped ODE (in Absolute and Relative
Terms) and Maximizing the Solution
If instead of a harmonic force, the SDOF dynamic system can be subjected to a harmonic displacement such as a
support motion. Let us consider the equation of motion in absolute terms at first.
m&u&( t )
k(u(t)- us(t))
m
u(t)
c(u&( t ) − u&s ( t ) )
us(t) = u0sinωt
Equation of motion
m& u&( t ) + c(u&( t ) − u&s ( t ) ) + k (u ( t ) − u s ( t ) ) = 0
Re placing u s ( t ) = u 0 sin ωt
m&u&( t ) + cu&( t ) + ku ( t ) = ku 0 sin ωt + cωu 0 cos ωt
u&( t ) + cu&( t ) + ku ( t ) = p 0 sin (ωt + β)
m&
where p 0 = u 0 k 2 + (cω) = u 0 k 1 + (2ζω / ω n )
2 2
tan β = cω / k = 2ζω / ω n
This equation is similar to that of the harmonic loading except that there is a phase angle β in the loading. Hence
the steady state solution is also similar except for the addition of the β phase angle.
p0 / k 2ζω / ω n
u (t) = sin (ωt + β − θ ) θ = tan −1
(1 − ω ω n ) + ( 2ζω / ω n )
2 2 2 2 (1 − ω 2 ω 2n )
But now, p0/k is not the static displacement any longer. Replacing the expression for p0
u 0 1 + (2ζω / ω n )
2
2ζω / ω n
u (t) = sin (ωt + β − θ ) θ = tan −1
(1 − ω 2
ω 2n ) 2 + ( 2ζω / ω n ) 2 (1 − ω 2 ω 2n )
The amplitude of the response is thus

u 0 1 + (2ζω / ω n )
2
F=
(1 − ω 2 ω 2n ) 2 + ( 2ζω / ω n ) 2
Now, we define an expression for the relative transmissibility as the displacement response amplitude F divided by
the amplitude of the enforcing harmonic displacement,
F 1 + (2ζω / ω n )2
Tr = =
u0 (1 − ω 2 ω 2n ) 2 + ( 2ζω / ω n ) 2
This is the displacement transmissibility expression. The acceleration transmissibility is exactly similar. A plot of
Tr versus ω/ωn is somewhat similar to that of (the magnitude of the) dynamic amplification D versus ω/ωn, except
that all the curves of different ζ pass through the same point of Tr = 1.0 when ω/ωn = √2. Noting the curves after
383
Second Edition
this point it is observed that damping tends to reduce the effectiveness of vibration isolation for frequency ratios
greater than √2.
Variation of Tr with Frequency Ratio

For Different Damping
6
zhi=0
Transmissibility, Tr
5
zhi=0.1
4 zhi=0.2
zhi=0.3
3
zhi=0.4
2 zhi=1.0
zhi=2.0
1
0
0 1 2
ω/ω
This formula is effective to determine the stiffness and damping (hence natural frequency) of an isolation system
knowing the input displacement or acceleration and the maximum acceptable dynamic displacement or acceleration
that the structural component can be subjected to.
Remember that only when damping is small that the maximum transmissibility can be approximated to occur at
resonance. When damping is high, it is imperative that the transmissibility expression be differentiated (also use
cannot be made of ω = ωn(1-2ζ2)1/2 as this is based on differentiating and maximizing the (magnitude of the)
dynamic amplification factor, D).
greater than √2 (where a spring mounting supporting system acts as an effective vibration isolator). This is not so
384
Second Edition
Note that the above relationships were based on the absolute terms of acceleration, velocity and displacement, not
the relative. The expression for u as depicted in the diagrams is always the absolute displacement. The notion of
relative terms only arises when we have support motion. Note that in absolute terms, we need the support
displacement and velocity in the equation of motion whilst in relative terms we need only the support acceleration
in the equation of motion. Finding an expression for the relative displacement can be useful especially if we want to
calculate the shear and bending forces induced in the isolating system. Of course we could subtract the absolute
quantities, but this may prove difficult, as the there is a phase difference between the input and response quantities.
In absolute terms, the equation of motion

m&u&( t ) + c(u&( t ) − u&s ( t ) ) + k (u ( t ) − u s ( t ) ) = 0
In relative terms
u r ( t) = u(t ) − u s (t)
Hence,
m(& u&s ( t ) ) + cu&r ( t ) + ku r ( t ) = 0
u&r ( t ) + &
m&
u&r ( t ) + cu&r ( t ) + ku r ( t ) = −m& u&s ( t )
Re placing u s ( t ) = u 0 sin ωt
m&
u&r ( t ) + cu&r ( t ) + ku r ( t ) = mω 2 u 0 sin ωt
This equation is similar to that of the harmonic loading except that the harmonic force excitation amplitude is now
mω2u0. Hence the steady state solution for the relative displacement is
mu 0 ω 2 / k 2ζω / ω n
u r (t ) = sin (ωt − θ ) θ = tan −1
(1 − ω 2
ω 2n ) 2 + ( 2ζω / ω n ) 2 (1 − ω 2 ω 2n )
u 0 ω / ω 2n
2
2ζω / ω n
= sin (ωt − θ ) θ = tan −1
(1 − ω 2
ω 2n ) 2 + ( 2ζω / ω n ) 2 (1 − ω 2 ω 2n )
385
Second Edition
4.6 GL, ML Frequency Domain Analysis – Deterministic and Random Dynamic Response Analysis
4.6.1 Mathematical Preliminaries of Representing Dynamic Characteristics in the Frequency Domain
The complex frequency response function (FRF) due to a loading {P(ω)} is defined as
{F(ω)} = {P(ω)}
−ω 2
[M ] + iω[C] + [K ]
The complex transfer function (a.k.a. the dynamic flexibility matrix) is defined as the complex frequency
response function due to unit harmonic excitations
[H(ω)] = 1
− ω [M ] + iω[C] + [K ]
2
[
{u ( t )} = Re al [H(ω)]{P(ω)}e iωt ]
The displacement transfer function H(ω) (steady state displacement response per unit harmonic force) is known as
the receptance. The velocity transfer function ωH(ω) (steady state velocity response per unit harmonic force) is
known as the mobility. The acceleration transfer function ω2H(ω) (steady state acceleration response per unit
harmonic force) is known as the inertance.
The transfer function or the dynamic flexibility matrix [H(ω)] is actually the Fourier Transform of the unit impulse
response matrix [h(t-τ)] (a.k.a. dynamic stiffness matrix) defined for the (implicit) time domain (for modal
solutions; not direct solutions).
The (magnitude of the) dynamic amplification factor D(ω) is defined as the magnitude of the complex response
In (implicit) time domain solutions based on modal methods, the unit impulse response matrix (a.k.a. dynamic
stiffness matrix) is the crucial matrix that transforms the excitation to the response as described by the Duhamel’s
or convolution integral expression as follows
∫ [h (t − τ)]{P(τ)}dτ
t
{u ( t )} =
0
This impulse response matrix [h(t-τ)] (a.k.a. dynamic stiffness matrix) is actually the Inverse Fourier Transform of
the dynamic flexibility matrix or the transfer function [H(ω)] defined for the frequency domain. A unit impulse is
theoretically a force time history that occurs over zero time, but has a unit value of the integral of force/time curve.
That obviously implies infinite force, which can't exist in reality, but is a very useful approximation when the time
of the impulse is short compared to the periods of interest in the response. The response in the time domain to an
impulse excitation can be calculated using the Duhamel's Integral (Convolution Integral). A unit impulse excitation
will produce what is known as the unit impulse response matrix function (a.k.a. dynamic stiffness) in the time
domain. Now, the unit impulse response matrix function (a.k.a. dynamic stiffness) is the Inverse Fourier Transform
of the dynamic flexibility matrix (i.e. the transfer function). Conversely, the dynamic flexibility matrix (i.e. the
transfer function) is the Fourier Transform of the unit impulse response matrix function (a.k.a. dynamic stiffness).
386
Second Edition
4.6.2 GL, ML Vibration Testing
The purpose of the vibration testing is to establish the modal properties (modal frequencies, modal mass and
modal damping) of the system for correlation with the finite element model. Vibration testing is also used to
establish the response to certain excitations to be compared to that of the finite element model to verify the
analysis procedure.
The vibration test could either be
(i) Impact (Hammer or Heel-Drop) Test (Artificial Excitation) – For Model Correlation
(ii) Shaker Table Test (Artificial Excitation) – For Model Correlation
(iii) Response Measurements (Actual Excitation) – For Analysis Procedure Verification
For model correlation, the vibration tests can be used to measure the applied excitation and the structural
response. For analysis procedure verification, the vibration test measures the RESPONSE of the structure to the
induced excitations, not the actual excitations themselves.
4.6.2.1 Vibration Testing for Model Correlation
Vibration
FE Equivalent Response Derived information
Test
Time history signal of ensuing free With knowledge of frequency
Impact Test vibration, the frequency content of content, time history signal can be
SOL 109 with
and which can be obtained by FFT. Note signal processed (i.e. filtered) to
impact force
Logarithmic that this is NOT the frequency yield single mode time history,
excitation
Decrement response function FRF, F(ω). The which by logarithmic decrement
phase information is random. provides modal damping
Time history signal of ensuing free
vibration and the knowledge of the
excitation function can be used to H(ω) (with real and imaginary or
derive unit impulse response matrix magnitude and phase info) provides
Impact Test SOL 109 with (a.k.a. dynamic stiffness matrix), h(t- frequency content, modal damping
∫ [h(t − τ)]{P(τ)}dτ
and Transfer impact force t and modal mass. H(ω) (with only
τ) from {u ( t )} =
Function excitation 0 magnitude info) provides frequency
which can transformed by Forward content and approximate modal
FFT to obtain the complex transfer damping by half-power bandwidth.
function H(ω) (a.k.a. the dynamic
flexibility matrix)
F(ω) (with real and imaginary or
Shaker Table magnitude and phase info) provides
SOL 108 with
Test and frequency content, modal damping
wide-band Frequency response function FRF,
Frequency and modal mass. F(ω) (with only
harmonic F(ω)
Response magnitude info) provides frequency
excitation
Function content and approximate modal
damping by half-power bandwidth.
H(ω) (with real and imaginary or
Frequency response function FRF, magnitude and phase info) provides
Shaker Table SOL 108 with
frequency content, modal damping
Test and wide-band F(ω) which divided by the excitation
and modal mass. H(ω) (with only
Transfer harmonic static force provides the transfer
Function excitation magnitude info) provides frequency
function H(ω)
content and approximate modal
damping by half-power bandwidth.
387
Second Edition
4.6.2.1.1 Impact Test and Logarithmic Decrement
The impact excites the natural modes of vibration. An impact test produces an impulse, which excites the modes, of
course some more than others.
Response Spectrum
2.5
1.5
Dimax
0.5
0
0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 4 4.5
td/T i
It is really not necessary to know which modes are excited more as we are really only interested in finding out the
natural frequencies of the structure, not the response.
To perform signal processing of the impact test

(I) First, read in all the acceleration time history signals
(II) For each acceleration time history signal

(i) Plot the signal; ∆t = t2 – t1; sampling frequency = 1/∆t
(ii) FFT/PSD (use linear scale instead of logarithmic) the signal to establish its frequency
content
For each mode of interest

(iii) Design a filter to filter the mode of interest for damping estimation. Employ the
Butterworth IRR Algorithm, specify the sampling frequency, specify the order and whether
it is a low-pass, high-pass or band-pass filter
(iv) Filter the signal and plot the (single frequency) filtered signal
(v) FFT/PSD the (single frequency) filtered signal to ascertain the effectiveness and accuracy
of the filter
388
Second Edition
(vi) Perform a logarithmic decrement on the (single frequency) filtered signal to determine the
modal damping of the mode of interest
Next mode of interest

Next acceleration time history signal
The impact test establishes the natural frequencies and the damping of the structure and is useful for model
correlation. Clearly, this method is reliable only if the modes are well spaced out.
389
Second Edition
4.6.2.2 Vibrating Testing For Analysis Procedure Verification
Response measurements are made to verify the FE analysis procedure. Note that the starting transient occurs at the
natural frequencies of the structure whilst the steady-state response is at the frequencies of excitation.
To perform signal processing of the response measurements, first read in all the acceleration or velocity time
history signals.
For each time history

(I) Compare the peak of the UNFILTERED time history with established criteria.
(II) Compute the (1.0s say) RMS of the ULFILTERED time history. Compare the maximum RMS (of the
RMS values from each 1.0s window) with established criteria. Note that the RMS over the entire
duration will be lower than over short intervals such as 1.0s.
(III) To compare the peak and the (1.0s say) RMS of the FILTERED time history with established criteria,
(i) Plot the signal; ∆t = t2 – t1; sampling frequency = 1/∆t.
(ii) Design a filter to filter the signal into its 1/3rd octave bands. Employ the Butterworth IRR
Algorithm, specify the sampling frequency, specify the order and band-pass filter.
(iii) Filter the signal and plot the filtered signals.
(iv) Compute the peaks of each 1/3rd octave band filtered signal. Compare the peak values from
each 1/3rd octave band filtered signal with established (frequency dependent) criteria.
(v) Compute the RMS of each filtered signal in time intervals of 1.0s say. Compute the
maximum RMS (of the RMS values from each 1.0s time interval) for one RMS value for
each 1/3rd octave band. Note that the RMS over the entire duration will be lower than over
short intervals such as 1.0s. Compute the maximum RMS (of the RMS values for each
1/3rd octave band) and compare with established (frequency dependent) criteria. Note also
that the unfiltered RMS will be larger than the filtered RMS.
Next time history signal
390
Second Edition
4.6.3 GL, ML Steady-State Response of Deterministic Periodic (Not Necessarily Harmonic) Long Duration
Excitation Utilizing Fourier Series (or Generally Utilizing Fast Fourier Transforms FFT)
(a) Deterministic periodic non-harmonic long duration loading functions
4.6.3.1 Fourier Series
The French Mathematician J. Fourier (1768-1830) postulated that any deterministic periodic function can be
expressed as the summation of a number of sinusoidal waves of varying frequency, amplitude and phase. A
deterministic periodic (of period T) function that is not necessarily harmonic can thus be expressed as a
summation of an infinite number of sine and cosine terms, i.e. a Fourier Series. Forced responses (steady-state) are
performed in the frequency domain with these individual harmonics (with the correct amplitudes and phase
differences) as the excitations. Note that since this method is performed in the frequency domain, the response
calculated is the steady-state response. Hence, it is assumed that the excitation is periodic and long enough for
steady-state conditions to be achieved. The total steady-state response is thus the summation of the responses of
the individual harmonics.
A general deterministic periodic (of period T) function that is not necessarily harmonic can be expressed as a
summation of an infinite number of sine and cosine terms, i.e. a Continuous Fourier Series.
∞
P( t ) = a 0 + ∑ [a
n =1
n cos nωt + b n sin nωt ]
1 T 2 T 2 T
a0 =
T 0 ∫
P( t )dt a n =
T 0 ∫
P( t ) cos nωtdt b n =
T 0 ∫
P( t ) sin nωtdt
The constant a0 is the mean component of the force. The coefficients an and bn which is constant for each harmonic
n, is the amplitudes of the harmonics. Usually only the first few harmonics need to be included as the response to
higher harmonics may be negligible. An illustration is presented for a saw tooth function.
The Fourier Series representation is as follows. Even with only 3 Fourier terms, the representation is pretty good.
391
Second Edition
The total response will then be the summation of all the responses due to the individual harmonics. For a SDOF
system, the steady-state response due to the constant a0 force is
a0
u mean ( t ) =
k
The steady-state response due to a ancosnωt force
an / k 2ζnω / ω n
u cos ( t ) = cos( nωt − θ) θ = tan −1
(1 − nω ( ) 2
ω 2n ) 2 + (2ζnω / ω n ) 2 ( )
(1 − nω 2 ω 2n )
The steady-state response due to a bnsinnωt force

bn / k 2ζ nω / ω n
u sin ( t ) = sin( nωt − θ) θ = tan −1
(1 − nω ( ) 2
ω 2n ) 2 + (2ζnω / ω n ) 2 ( )
(1 − nω 2 ω 2n )
The total SDOF steady-state response is thus the summation of the above three components for all harmonics m.
∞
u ( t ) = u mean (t ) + ∑ [u
n =1
cos ( t ) + u sin ( t )]
4.6.3.2 Discrete Fourier Series
In the Fourier Series Analysis, the original continuous loading function P(t) can be represented exactly by a
continuous function if an infinite (Fourier) series is adopted. Now, if the function P(t) is supplied only at N equally
spaced time intervals (∆t = T/N) t0, t1, t2, … ,tN-1, where tj = j∆t, the Discrete Fourier Series results
∞
P( t j ) = a 0 + ∑ [a
n =1
n cos nωt j + b n sin nωt j ]
N −1
1
a0 =
T
∑ P( t
j= 0
j)
N −1
2
an =
T
∑ P( t
j= 0
j ) cos nωt j ∆t
N −1
2
bn =
T
∑ P( t
j= 0
j ) sin nωt j ∆t
392
Second Edition
Whereas the Fourier Series could represent a deterministic continuous and periodic function exactly if an
infinite number of harmonics were utilized, the Discrete Fourier Series can represent a deterministic discrete
and non-periodic function exactly only at the discrete points if an infinite number of harmonics are adopted.
4.6.3.3 Discrete Fourier Series in Complex Notation
In practice the Fourier coefficients a0, an and bn prove very cumbersome to manipulate algebraically. Complex
number theory helps with this aspect as all three coefficients may be replaced by one complex coefficient Cn.
Recapping basic complex number theory,
a complex number contains real and imaginary components

z = x + iy
it can be written in a polar form by computing the magnitude and the phase
z =  x 2 + y 2 e iθ , θ = tan −1 ( y / x )
 
z =  x 2 + y 2 (cos θ + i sin θ), θ = tan −1 ( y / x )
 
Writing
[a n cos nωt + b n sin nωt ] = Re al[a n cos nωt + ia n sin nωt − ib n cos nωt − i 2 b n sin nωt ]
= Re al[(a n − ib n )(cos nωt + i sin nωt )]
[
= Re al Λ n e inωt ]
the Discrete Fourier Series can be rewritten in complex notation as follows
∞ inωt 
P( t j ) = a 0 + Re al  Λ n e j 
 n =1 
∑
Λ n = a n − ib n
but since
N −1 N −1
2 2
an =
T
∑ P( t ) cos nωt ∆t
j= 0
j j and bn =
T
∑ P(t ) sin nωt ∆t
j= 0
j j
we have
Λ n = a n − ib n
N −1
2
∑ P( t
− inωt j
= j )e ∆t
T j= 0
and thus the Discrete Fourier Series can be rewritten in complex notation as follows
∞ inωt 
P( t j ) = a 0 + Re al Λ n e j 
 n =1 
∑
N −1
2
∑ P( t
−inωt j
Λn = j )e ∆t
T j= 0
393
Second Edition
4.6.3.4 Double Sided Discrete Fourier Series in Complex Notation
The Discrete Fourier Series in Complex Notation expression may be simplified even further by the introduction of
negative frequencies. These have the effect of cancelling the imaginary components and hence allowing the
Real[…]function to be dropped as presented below.
∞
1 1 −∞
∑ ∑
inωt j inωt
P( t j ) = a 0 + Λne + Λne j
2 n =1 2 n = −1
N −1
2
∑ P( t
−inωt j
Λn = j )e ∆t
T j= 0
To prove that the Double Sided expression is the same as the single sided with Re […] expression, the following
back analysis is performed.
∞
1 1 −∞
∑ ∑
inωt j inωt
P( t j ) = a 0 + Λne + Λne j
2 n =1 2 n = −1
∞ −∞
∑ (a n − ib n )(cos nωt j + i sin nωt j ) + ∑ (a n ( )

1 1
= a0 + − ib n ) cos nωt j + i sin nωt j
2 n =1 2 n = −1
∞ ∞
∑ (a n − ib n )(cos nωt j + i sin nωt j ) + ∑ (a n + ib n )(cos nωt j − i sin nωt j ); Note Λ −n = a n + ib n

1 1
= a0 +
2 n =1 2 n =1
∞
∑ (2a )
1
= a0 + n cos nωt j + 2b n sin nωt j
2 n =1
∞
= a0 + ∑ (a
n =1
n cos nωt j + b n sin nωt j )
∞ inωt 
= a 0 + Re al Λ n e j 
 n =1 
∑
Hence, proven. We then change the limits of the summation the Fourier coefficients so that a0 and Λn can be
replaced with the single complex Fourier coefficient Cn. Hence from
∞
1 1 −∞
∑ ∑
inωt j inωt
P( t j ) = a 0 + Λne + Λne j
2 n =1 2 n = −1
N −1
2
∑ P( t
−inωt j
Λn = j )e ∆t
T j= 0
we thus have
∞
∑C
inωt j
P( t j ) = ne
n = −∞
N −1
1 1
∑ P( t
− inωt j
Cn = Λn = j )e ∆t
2 T j= 0
where even the a0 term is accounted for by Cn. Knowing that tj = j∆t, T = N∆t and ω = 2π/T
∞
P( t j ) = ∑C
n = −∞
ne
2 πi ( nj / N )
N −1
1
Cn =
N
∑ P( t
j= 0
j )e
− 2 πi ( nj / N )
394
Second Edition
Hence we have derived the Double Sided Discrete Fourier Series in Complex Notation. This expression is is said to
be double sided because it uses both positive and negative frequencies to represent the Fourier coefficients. From
the Double Sided Discrete Fourier Series in Complex Notation, we now define the Discrete Fourier Transform of
the series P(tj) as Cn.
1 N −1
Cn = ∑
N j= 0
P ( t j )e − 2 πi ( nj / N )
Because the phase information is also stored, the time signal can be regenerated from the Discrete Fourier
Transform using the Discrete Inverse Fourier Transform
∞
P( t j ) = ∑C e
n = −∞
n
2 πi ( nj / N )
infinite number of harmonics were utilized, the Double Sided Discrete Fourier Series in Complex Notations
can represent a deterministic discrete and non-periodic function exactly only at the discrete points if an infinite
number of harmonics are adopted.
4.6.3.5 Normalized Double Sided Discrete Fourier Series in Complex Notation
Each Fourier coefficient Cn is obtained for a frequency of n/T Hz, the frequency interval between each coefficient
∆f is therefore 1/T Hz. This causes problems as the frequency at which the coefficients are calculated is dependent on
the period T chosen. It is common practice to normalize the Fourier Transform coefficients Cn to eliminate the
dependence on T. The normalized coefficients take the form of a density function and the Fourier coefficient is
obtained from the area under the density curve for the range ∆f = 1/T in question. The Inverse Fourier Transform is
thus
1 ∞ ∞
P( t j ) =
T n = −∞
∑
c n e 2 πi ( nj / N ) instead of P( t j ) = ∑
n = −∞
C n e 2 πi ( nj / N ) Note that here T is
period, not duration!
and the Fourier Transform Density Function is
T N −1 1 N −1
cn = ∑
N j= 0
P( t j )e − 2 πi ( nj / N ) instead of Cn = ∑
N j= 0
P ( t j )e − 2 πi ( nj / N )
The Fourier Transform Density Function and Inverse Fourier Transform transformations are illustrated.
395
Second Edition
infinite number of harmonics were utilized, the Normalized Double Sided Discrete Fourier Series in
Complex Notations can represent a deterministic discrete and non-periodic function exactly only at the
discrete points if an infinite number of harmonics are adopted.
With the definition of the Fourier Density Function, the amplitude and phase of a frequency component with
frequency f is now obtained by taking the magnitude and argument of the sum of area under the density curve
within ∆f at f and -f.
The area under the Fourier Density Function is given as a complex number; the amplitude content can be obtained
by taking the modulus of this complex area and the phase content from the argument or this complex area. The
Fourier Density Function of a stationary random signal is a plot of amplitude (and phase) against frequency. A sine
wave of frequency ω, amplitude A and initial phase angle φ is represented in the frequency domain by a spike
occurring at ω along the frequency axis. If the magnitude of the complex Fourier Density Function is plotted, then
the area under the spike is found to be the amplitude A of the sine wave. When the argument of the complex
Fourier Density Function is plotted then the area is found to be initial phase angle φ of the sine wave. Therefore,
if we want to find the amplitude and phase of the sinusoidal waves in a particular frequency range, say between 2
and 2.5 Hz, we can measure the area under the curve in that frequency range.
4.6.3.6 Symmetrical Normalized Double Sided Discrete Fourier Series in Complex Notation
In order to maintain the symmetry with its transform pair, i.e. the Discrete Fourier Transform Density Function
T N −1
cn =
N j= 0
∑P( t j )e − 2 πi ( nj / N )
the Discrete Inverse Fourier Transform is limited to only N terms (i.e. from 0 to N–1) as follows
1 N −1
P( t j ) = ∑
T n =0
c n e 2 πi ( nj / N )
It is paramount to realize that in the Discrete Inverse Fourier Transform summation indicated above, the
frequencies increase up to only N/2 and not N−1. This is because it can be shown that for n > N/2, the
396
Second Edition
corresponding frequencies are equal to the negative frequencies of order N−n. This fact restricts the harmonic
frequency components that may be represented in the series to a maximum of N/2. The frequency corresponding to
this maximum order ωN/2 = (N/2)ω is known as the Nyquist frequency (a.k.a. folding frequency). Moreover, if there
are harmonic components above ωN/2 in the original function, these higher components will introduce distortions in
the lower harmonic components of the series, a phenomenon known as aliasing. Hence, it is recommended that the
number of sampled points, N should be at least twice the highest harmonic component present in the function.
infinite number of harmonics were utilized, the Symmetrical Normalized Double Sided Discrete Fourier
Series in Complex Notations can represent a deterministic discrete and non-periodic function approximately
only at the discrete points since the number of harmonics is limited to N/2 i.e. from -N/2 to N/2 instead of ∞
i.e. from –∞ to ∞ and if components of frequency higher than the Nyquist, ωN/2 = (N/2)ω = (N/2)(2π/T) =
πN/T = π/∆t exist in the time signal, aliasing (distortions in the lower harmonic components) occurs, noting
however that the latter reason is user avoidable.
4.6.3.7 Symmetrical Normalized Single Sided Discrete Fourier Series in Complex Notation
The Single Sided Fourier Transform Density Function contains the same information as the Double Sided Fourier
Transform Density Function but is often more convenient to use as negative frequencies are not considered. In
order to maintain the same intensity of the original time signal, the Single Sided Fourier Transform Density
Function is doubled. The Single Sided Discrete Fourier Transform Density Function of the series P(tj) and the
corresponding Single Sided Discrete Inverse Fourier Transform are respectively
N −1
2T N / 2 1
cn = ∑
N j= 0
P( t j )e − 2 πi ( nj / N ) and P( t j ) =
T
∑c
n =0
ne
2 πi ( nj / N )
The following time history will produce the following Double Sided Fourier Transform Density Functions.
And the time history will instead produce the following Single Sided Fourier Transform Density Functions.
397
Second Edition
4.6.3.8 Practicalities of the Specification of the Fast Fourier Transform (FFT) Representation
An extremely efficient computational algorithm, which employs the Discrete Fourier Transform concept is the Fast
Fourier Transform (FFT). Note that whereas the Fourier Series can represent deterministic periodic functions, the
Fast Fourier Transform FFT can represent deterministic non-periodic functions. Again, since the FFT method
is performed in the frequency domain, the response calculated is the steady-state response. Hence, it is assumed
that the excitation is periodic and long enough for steady-state conditions to be achieved. The concept of Fourier
Series and the Fast Fourier Transform representations is presented.
Fourier Series Method Represents Deterministic, Periodic Functions
Fast Fourier Transform Method Represents Deterministic, Non-periodic Functions
However, since the analysis is performed in the frequency domain, the response is steady-state and hence we shall
use the Fast Fourier Transform FFT method to solve excitations which are deterministic, periodic and long
duration for steady-state conditions to be achieved. Hence, forced response due to an impulse must be performed
in the time domain and cannot be performed in the frequency domain although h(t−τ) and H(ω) are a Fourier
Transform pair. This means that although the excitation in the time and frequency domains and the structural
characteristics (h(t−τ) and H(ω)) are interchangeable with the Fourier Transforms, the response in the time and
frequency domain are only comparable if the excitation is deterministic, periodic and long duration for steady
state conditions to be achieved, a condition which is not achieved for an impulsive excitation.
The FFT must follow certain rules. The time signal should follow the 2N rule, N an integer. This means that
the number of data points within the time signal should be 32, 64, 128, 256, 512, 1024, 2048 … 131072 for the
FFT to be computed. Three considerations should be made in choosing the parameters digitizing a time
history signal. Firstly, if N is the number of sample intervals, it can be shown mathematically that the
Discrete Inverse Fourier Transform representation is restricted to a maximum of N/2 harmonic components
in the series, i.e. N/2 spectral lines.
1
Number of points in positive FFT = x number of points in time signal, N
2
This occurs because for n > N/2, the corresponding frequencies are equal to the negative of frequencies order
N-n. Secondly, the maximum harmonic component that can be represented is (N/2)ω, where ω here is 2π/T,
T being the entire duration of loading.
N N 2π N 2π π
ωy = ω= = =
2 2 T 2 N∆t ∆t
ωy 1
fy = =
2π 2∆t
In other words,
1
Nyquist Frequency, f y = x sampling frequency
2
1 1
= x
2 time step, ∆t
The frequency of this maximum harmonic component is called the Nyquist frequency or the folding
frequency. Thirdly, if harmonic components above the Nyquist frequency were present in the original
function, it would introduce distortions in the lower harmonic components of the series, a phenomenon
called aliasing. The sampling frequency must then be two times the highest frequency component so that the
Nyquist frequency (which is half the sampling frequency) becomes equal to the highest frequency component
of interest. This is also obvious from observation of the function. A triangular pulse of a frequency of 100Hz
398
Second Edition
(period 0.01s) requires at least 3 sampling points to define the triangular shape. Three sampling points here
means that the sampling frequency will be 200Hz (0.005s). The Nyquist frequency will then be 200Hz/2 =
100Hz, which again is the frequency of that of the triangular pulse. Hence the FFT should represent all the
frequency components of the original time signal to avoid aliasing.
USER CHOICE (CHOOSE 2 OF 4) CONSEQUENCE

Nyquist Number ∆f = Nyquist
Time Sampling Number Frequency = of Frequency /
Duration
Step, Frequency of Time Sampling Spectral Number of Remark
= N∆t (s)
∆t (s) = 1/∆t (Hz) Steps, N Frequency / Lines = Spectral Lines
2 (Hz) N/2 (Hz)
0.02 50 1024 20.48 25 512 0.049 Original
0.02 50 2048 40.96 25 1024 0.024 More resolution
0.04 25 1024 40.96 12.5 512 0.024 More resolution, lower Nyquist
0.01 100 1024 10.24 50 512 0.098 Less resolution, higher Nyquist
We can make a couple of conclusions. First, the time step should be chosen to capture all frequency
components of the time signal so that the Nyquist frequency (which is half the sampling frequency) is at least
equal to the highest frequency component to avoid aliasing. To be sure of this, one may filter the signal
electronically to remove all frequencies above the Nyquist frequency. Second, the more the number of time
steps, N and/or the larger the time step ∆t (so long as the sampling frequency 1/∆t is still at least twice the
highest frequency component in the time signal to avoid aliasing) the better the resolution as ∆f = 1/T.
Hence, for example, if say we are interested in capturing a time signal with frequency components up to say 25Hz,
we thus specify a digitizing sampling frequency of 50Hz (so that the Nyquist frequency which is half the sampling
frequency equals the highest frequency of interest) i.e. a time step of 0.02s whilst filtering all frequencies above
25Hz to avoid aliasing. Then, we choose the number of time steps, N of 1024, 2048, 4096 etc … and hence the
duration N∆t so that an acceptable resolution is obtained on the Fourier Transform Density Function knowing that
the number of spectral lines is N/2.
399
Second Edition
4.6.3.9 MSC.NASTRAN Fast Fourier Transform Analysis Methodology
The Fourier Transform method provides an efficient alternative method of determining the steady-state transient
response of the equations of motion. It avoids the lengthy time integration of the transient equations of motion with
the repetitive periodic input of the loading function. Time-dependent applied loads are transformed to the frequency
domain using the Double Sided Fourier Transform Density Function
T N −1
cn =
N j= 0
∑P( t j )e − 2 πi ( nj / N )
before all frequency dependent matrix calculations are completed in the frequency domain.
{u (ω n )} = [H (ω)]{c n }
Then using the Inverse Fourier Transform
N −1
1
P( t j ) =
T
∑ u (ω
n =0
n )e
2 πi ( nj / N )
the frequency response solution variables are then transformed back into the time domain. The steady-state
response to the forcing function P(tj) is thus
[
{u ( t j )} = Re al [H (ω)]P( t j ) ]
1 N −1
c n e 2 πi ( nj / N ) 
= Re al  ∑ − ω [M] + iω[C] + [K]
2
T n =0 
Fourier transform methods have been implemented in MSC.NASTRAN to integrate the equations of motion in
order to obtain the aeroelastic response of fixed wing aircraft. This capability is especially important for this type of
analysis since the unsteady aerodynamic matrices are known only in the frequency domain. The Fourier transform
method may also be used to solve for the transient response of conventional structural models (no aerodynamic
effects) subjected to periodic loads. This capability is available in SOL 108 and SOL 111 for frequency response
output data. For transient type output, SOL 146 must be used. The transformation is performed quite simply when
the requested load is the time dependent TLOADi form instead of a frequency dependent RLOADi entry.
In MSC.NASTRAN, two forms of the Fourier transform are available, namely the Fourier series and the Fourier
integral. Both methods require necessary numerical compromises and hence produce numerical approximations.
In the Fourier series, the basic time interval is 0 < t < T, with the function periodic. The circular frequencies are
given by
where T is a large time equal to the period of the lowest forcing frequency. The load transformation for a load at
point a is given for each requested frequency by
The response at point j is given by
400
Second Edition
where Hja(ωn) is the frequency response of any physical variable due to unit load. The response in the time domain
is given by
In the Fourier Integral, the time interval is the limit as T ∞, ∆f 0, and 2πn∆f ω of the Fourier series.
Here, ω is a continuous variable. The corresponding load transformation, frequency response and time domain
response relationships are presented.
The approach that must be undertaken by the user in MSC.NASTRAN is described.
(a) The solution scheme must be SOL 108, SOL 111 or SOL 145. The SOL 145 requires the cards of SOL
111 with the addition of TSTEP Case Control and Bulk Data cards.
(b) The user must define a time domain function that vanishes for t > T. Note that T is the interval of
the periodic function. For piecewise linear tabular functions (TLOAD1), a table of pairs (xi, Yi)(i = 1,N)
prescribes N-1 time intervals. If an X1 shift and an X2 scale factor are included, the time-dependent load at
point a is given by
where Aa is an amplitude factor and τa is a delay factor that may depend upon the loading point. Likewise,
the general function (TLOAD2) is defined by
The value of n must be an integer for transient analysis by the Fourier method. Do not mix loading
functions of RLOADi with TLOADi.
(c) Use constant frequency spacing, ∆f = 1/T
(d) Three approximation methods are available to evaluate the inverse Fourier transform which may be
selected by the user via the parameter IFTM, namely Method 0, Method 1 and Method 2.
Consider the response of a simple damped oscillator to a pulse. The upper three curves show the pulse and the
response of the system if it is very stable and slightly stable. Using the Fourier method, the pulse is replaced by a
series of pulses, with period .
401
Second Edition
As can be seen, this method gives good results if the system is damped, but an incorrect impression if the system is
lightly damped. Thus, in order for the results of the Fourier method to be valid:
1. The system should be reasonably well damped.
2. The forcing function should be zero for some time interval to allow decay.
3. The frequency interval
In general, Methods 1 and 2 are more accurate than Method 0. However, these methods introduce positive artificial
damping into the result that may lead to erroneous conclusions in stability studies.
Note that an alternative to the Fourier Method is to perform a SOL 108 or SOL 111 with multiple RLOADi
entries to define the different harmonics of the signal, with the correct phase difference. This of course
depends on knowing the harmonics which could be derived by manually performing an FFT on the periodic
signal.
402
Second Edition
4.6.4 GL, ML Steady-State Response of Random, Gaussian, and Stationary (and Ergodic) Excitations
Utilizing Power Spectral Density (PSD) Functions
(a) Random stationary (and ergodic) long duration loading functions
4.6.4.1 Statistic of Time Domain Function
The statistics of a random function P(t) of duration T can be characterized by
(a) The mean, which is usually zero

1 T
P= ∫
T o
P( t )dt
(b) The root mean square (RMS) and root mean quad (RMQ), the latter gives greater weight to higher values
1/ 4
1 T 2 1 T 4 
RMS =
T o ∫
P ( t )dt RMQ = 
 T o ∫
P ( t )dt 

Note that the RMS of a continuous simple harmonic motion is amplitude/√2.
(c) The standard deviation, which is equal to the RMS when the mean is zero
∫ [P(t) − P] dt = (RMS) − (P )
1 T 2 2
σ=
2
T o
(d) The Gaussian (a.k.a. normal) probability density function PDF to define the amplitude of the
(narrowband and broadband) random function P(t). The area under the PDF defines the probability of
occurrence. Random loading functions P(t) usually follow the Gaussian (or normal) PDF distribution which
is a function of the mean and the standard deviation. The Gaussian is bell-shaped and is symmetrical about
the mean.
Pr obability(P1 ≤ P ≤ P2 ) =
P2
Gaussian ∫ P1
PDF(P)dP
1 P2 −
1
( )2
P− P / σ2
2 πσ ∫
= e 2 dP
P1
On integration of the Gaussian, it is shown that, the probability of P lying within 1 standard deviation from
the mean is 68.3%, within 2 standard deviations is 95.4% and within 3 standard deviations is 99.7%.
(e) The Rayleigh distribution to define the peaks A of the (narrowband) random vibration functions
P(t). The Rayleigh distribution is a function of the standard deviation.
Pr obability(A1 ≤ A ≤ A 2 ) =
A2
Rayleigh ∫ A1
PDF(A)dA
A2 A − A 2 / 2σ 2
= ∫ A1 σ2
e dA, A>0
403
Second Edition
The best way to visualize the amplitude and peak PDFs is to draw tram lines horizontally through the time
history and then count either the number of times the signal crosses the tram lines or the number of times a
peak occurs in-between the tram lines. The complete PDFs are obtained by repeating this process for all
horizontal levels in the signal.
(f) The irregularity factor characterizing the frequency content and bandedness of the time signal P(t) in
the time domain. The irregularity factor is defined as
E[0]
Irregularity factor, γ = ; 0 < γ <1
E[P]
where E(0) is the expected number of upward mean crossings and E(P) is the expected number of peaks.
Note that γ = 0.0 indicates white noise and γ = 1.0 indicates a pure sine wave. Practical values are presented.
γ = 1.0 Sine wave
γ ≈ 1.0 Narrowband process
γ ≈ 0.7 to 0.95 Broadband process
γ < 0.7 White noise process
A narrowband process is typically recognized in the time history by the amplitude modulation, often
referred to as a beat envelope. An important observation made of narrowband processes is that the peak and
trough of the time signal amplitude envelope is symmetrical about the time axis. This occurs because the
frequency content is in a narrowband and is thus almost similar to each other, and so the time signal always
passes through the mean (zero amplitude usually) in every cycle. It is interesting to note that the amplitude
probability density function (PDF) of a narrowband signal is Gaussian whilst the peak PDF is Rayleigh in
distribution. The time signal of a broadband process is not symmetrical about the time axis. This occurs
404
Second Edition
because the frequency content is in a broadband and is thus dissimilar to each other, and so the time signal
will not pass through the mean (zero amplitude usually) in every cycle. Hence, a broadband process is
typically characterized in the time domain by its positive valleys and negative peaks. It is interesting to note
that the amplitude PDF of a wide band signal is Gaussian.
(g) The auto-covariance (a.k.a. auto-correlation) characterizing the bandedness of the time signal P(t) in
the time domain. The auto-covariance function is defined
The notation Cyy indicates the auto-covariance function for a single process y. The notation is introduced to
distinguish between the 'cross-covariance function (Cxy)' for two random processes x and y defined as
follows.
For a zero mean time history, the auto-covariance can be rewritten as the infinite time average as follows.
A wide-banded process loses similarity within a short time shift and hence the auto-correlation function
becomes zero quickly. A narrowbanded process does not lose similarity and hence it takes a long time for
the auto-correlation function to become zero. For periodic processes with period T, the auto-covariance
function is also periodic with the same period. For stationary processes the auto-covariance function is
even, i.e.Cyy(τ) = Cyy(-τ), and may be expressed as a single sided function.
405
Second Edition
It is often convenient to normalize the covariance function in order to compare different time histories with
different scales of measurement. This is achieved by dividing the covariance by the variance. The
normalized covariance function is defined below, it has the same shape as the covariance function except
that the ordinate is scaled to have a value of 1 for τ=0.
The time scale is defined as the area under the normalized covariance function as below. For a random time
history this roughly equates to the mean zero crossing period of the time history. For a periodic time
history this is not the case however as . Ty → 0.
(h) The cross-covariance function characterizing the correlation between two time signals. We are
interested in the sequential relationship between the two time histories. The figure shows two anemometers
measuring wind speed placed side by side with separation d. From each anemometer a time history of the
wind speed is produced. If the two anemometers are far enough apart then the wind speed witnessed by one
will be completely independent of the other, they are said to be uncorrelated. As they are moved closer
together then a correlation between the two time histories will be noted. Correlation occurs because the
random turbulent wind incident on anemometer x is sufficiently large to also be influencing anemometer y.
The covariance function may be used to find the sequential relationships between the two time histories.
The notation Cyx is used to describe the cross-covariance function between the two random processes x and
y. It effectively tells us what the effect on y would be should a random process hit x.
406
Second Edition
4.6.4.2 Definition of the Power Spectral Density (PSD)
A random stationary forcing function has an imprecisely known magnitude, however all samples of the forcing
function have the same statistical characteristics. The statistics of stationary and ergodic processes can be described
by one sample that is sufficiently long in duration. The PSD represents the random function.
Consider the transformation from a single sided Fourier Density Spectra (as described in Section 4.6.3.7) to a
single sided PSD. The mean amplitude of the component sinusoidal waves over a frequency range ∆f is obtained
from the Fourier spectra by taking the modulus of the area under the curve expressed as follows.
Amplitude(fn) = ∆f.cn(fn)
The area under a PSD represents the mean squared amplitude of the component sinusoidal waves where
MeanSquare(fn) = ½[Amplitude(fn)]2. We can equate the mean square amplitudes calculated from the PSD and the
Fourier spectra and hence determine the transformation between the two, as follows.
1 2
∆f .G (f n ) = .∆f 2 . c n (f n )
2 Note that here T is
1 2 period, not duration!
∴ G (f n ) = . c n (f n )
2.T
The transformation from a double sided Fourier Density Spectra (as described in Section 4.6.3.6) to a double
sided PSD is expressed as follows.
1 2
S(f n ) = . c n (f n )
T
The PSD discards the initial phase information (of the individual harmonic components) of the FFT storing only
the amplitude squared and corresponding frequency information. The PSD is hence the modulus squared of the
FFT. Because there is no phase information, the PSD is no longer complex unlike the FFT.
PSDs are given in many of the design standards where random loading is involved. If the designer wishes to
determine how a non-linear structure will react to a typical random load history it is necessary to regenerate a
characteristic time history from the design PSD, this can then be analyzed using a dynamic analysis program in
the time domain. The PSD contains information on the amplitude and frequency content of the sinusoidal waves
but does not show the phase relationships. The discarding of the phase information means that the original signal
cannot be reproduced exactly deterministically. However, a random phase description can be applied (using the
Inverse Fourier Transform) in order to recreate a signal that is statistically similar. Hence, this means that the
creation of a PSD from a time signal should assume that the original signal is random in the first place.
407
Second Edition
In the past, the time signal used to be transformed to the auto-covariance function, then subsequently into the PSD.
Now, with the arrival of the Fast Fourier Transform FFT, the PSD is generated directly from the time signal.
The auto- and cross-spectral density functions are defined from the auto- and cross-covariance functions using
the Fourier Transform are follows.
In fact, the Fourier transform pair can be used to transform between the covariance functions and the PSDs.
The auto-covariance function is similar to a time history representation of the PSD. In effect it is the time history
of the mean square amplitude of the sinusoidal waves with a zero phase angle.
The correlation between two random processes can be described using the coherence function. The coherence
represents the degree of correlation between two random processes. Two uncorrelated events show zero coherence
where as two fully correlated events show unit coherence. The coherence function is defined below as a ratio of the
cross-power spectral density function to the geometric mean of the two auto-power spectral density functions.
Many design standards quote the auto-power spectral density function which the designer should use to verify the
design. Where there are correlated multiple events it is often easier to express the correlation in terms of the
coherence function than to specify many cross-power spectral density functions separately. The designer may then
derive his own cross-spectral density functions by rearranging the above equation. For certain analyses, such as
wind turbulence, the coherence function is expressed as a function of frequency and separation distance.
The regeneration of a time history from the double sided PSD is as follows (noting that y(fn) is another notation
for c(fn).
408
Second Edition
The regeneration of a time history from the single sided PSD is as follows (noting that y(fn) is another notation
for c(fn).
Practical ball park PSD vibration levels are presented. A PSD of 0.001 g2/Hz over 25 to 250 Hz would be
experienced inside a civil airliner. A PSD of 0.01 g2/Hz would be the level most electronic equipment is tested. A
PSD of 0.1 g2/Hz would make one feel quite uncomfortable and is typical in military vehicles. A PSD of 1.0 g2/Hz
would certainly make one extremely uncomfortable.
409
Second Edition
4.6.4.3 Validity of the PSD Representation
The specification of a PSD in place of a time signal (for a frequency domain analysis) is valid only when: -
(i) The signal is random (narrowband or broadband) in phase, i.e. the initial phase between the
different harmonic components is random. This may not be always true, in which case the signal is
deterministic, and the analysis should thus be performed using deterministic methods in the time or
frequency domain. If the time signal has a discernible spike or a superimposed dominating sine wave,
then it is unlikely that that will be random. Performing a frequency domain random analysis on a
deterministic signal is conservative. For instance, the PSD of a sine wave with an amplitude of say
140MPa is simply a spike. We know that the RMS of the sinusoidal time signal is 0.7071 times the
amplitude, hence 100MPa. This RMS will be represented by the square root of the area under the PSD.
We also know that generating a random time signal from a PSD will predict a peak amplitude of 3 (to
4.5) times the RMS, hence 300MPa here. This is because the amplitude distribution of a narrow or
broadband signal is Gaussian. This is much higher than the 140MPa value of the original signal. Thus
the frequency domain approach will be conservative.
(ii) The signal is Gaussian in its amplitude probability distribution. This is usually the case. Gaussian
means that the peak and amplitude probability density function are gaussian in nature or follow a bell
shaped curve as shown here. If you draw tram lines through a signal and count the number of times the
signal passes through it and plot that as a density function it is gaussian if it follows a bell shape. An
example of a non- gaussian signal is a pure sine wave. However adding multiple sine wave together
quickly becomes gaussian.
(iii) The signal is statistically stationary (and ergodic). This means that the statistics of the signal does not
change with time. This is usually the case. This ensures that the time signal is long enough to be
represented by the PSD. Stationarity refers to the fact that the average of the instantaneous
displacements of an ensemble of time history samples at a particular arbitrary time ti is the same as the
average at any other time ti. In addition, if the average obtained with respect to time for any time
history sample within the ensemble of time histories is equal to the average across the ensemble at an
arbitrary time ti, the random process is called ergodic. Thus in a stationary, ergodic process, a single
record may be used to obtain the statistical description of the random function.
410
Second Edition
4.6.4.4 Generation and Specification of the PSD
The following aspects are considered in the generation of a PSD from a time signal: -
(i) The number of points in the PSD, NFFT = number of data points / 2
(ii) Employ the Welsh Method
(iii) Employ the Hanning Window. The Hanning window shape accounts for the fact that the signals within
the buffers are not periodic, i.e. that they do not start and end at the zero. Incomplete cycles cause
spectral leakage, which gives errors in the PSD frequencies and amplitudes. This arises because of
Fourier’s assumption that the time history is periodic. Spectral leakage tends to occur with rectangular
window functions.
(iv) The size of the buffer or window, NWIND (<NFFT) is optimized to balance the statistical accuracy
and the statistical resolution. A PSD is obtained for each buffer sample of the time signal and is
averaged to obtain the averaged PSD. The method of averaging the PSDs should simply be a linear.
Other existing methods such as the peak-hold method are theoretically incorrect and should not be
used. If the buffer size is too big, then there will not be enough buffer samples to average over and
obtain a smooth PSD curve. If the PSD curve is found to be not so smooth, then it can be concluded
that there is too much scatter and the buffer size should be reduced. If the buffer size is too small, then
there will not be enough point within the buffer to compute a PSD with sufficient resolution. Note that
the number of points on the PSD is half the number of points in the time signal. Clearly a balance is
sought between statistical accuracy and statistical resolution. The method would be to start with a small
buffer size, gradually increasing the buffer size noting the increase in resolution, until too much scatter
is observed, suggesting the lack of buffer samples to average over.
(v) Let there be no overlap between the buffers. Let there be light!
(vi) There should not be buffer data normalization. A buffer data normalization will allow for the correction
of the mean offset of the time signal within each buffer. This mean offset however causes a large peak
at the zero Hz frequency. This is even theoretically incorrect, and hence buffer data normalization
should never be used. As for the global mean of the time signal, that should be removed before
computing the PSD anyway.
(vii) Do not employ zero-padded buffers as this artificially adds zero value points to the time signal when
the number of data points within the signal does not follow the rule 2n; this has the effect of changing
the statistics of the original signal.
The specification of a PSD should be supplemented with: -
(i) The mean of the time signal as a PSD does not contain information about the mean
A good method to check whether a PSD has been specified correctly from a time signal is to convert the PSD back
into a time signal and comparing the statistics of the new signal to that of the original signal.
411
Second Edition
4.6.4.5 Statistical Information Provided by the PSD
The PSD provides the following information: -
(i) A description of the frequency content within the signal. The PSD of a constant amplitude sine
wave is an infinite amplitude spike. The sine wave cannot be reproduced, as it is not random. A
sinusoidal time history appears as a single spike on the PSD plot. The spike is centered at the frequency
of the sine wave and the area of the spike represents the mean square amplitude of the wave. In theory
this spike should be infinitely tall and infinity narrow for a pure sine wave, however because of the
numerical analysis the spike will have a finite width and will therefore have a finite height. Remember,
with PSD plots we are interested in the area under the graph and not the height of the graph. The PSD
of a narrowband process is a finite amplitude spike within a narrow frequency band. The regenerated
amplitude envelope of the time signal will be irregular, but the signal will consist of only a few
dominant frequencies. The PSD of a broadband process is a multitude of finite amplitude spikes
within a broad frequency band. The PSD of a white noise is flat, i.e. the frequency content of the signal
shows a similar weighting to all frequencies.
412
Second Edition
To quantitatively describe the frequency content or bandedness of the PSD, the irregularity factor, γ
can be calculated based on the moments of the PSD. The nth moment of the PSD is
Hence, the irregularity factor is defined as follows
E[0]
Irregularity factor, γ = ; 0 < γ <1
E[P]
m2
Expected number of zero crossings, E[0] =
m0
Expected number of peaks, E[P] =

m4
m2
In theory all possible moments are required to fully characterize the original process. However, in
practice we find that m0, m1, m2, and m4 are sufficient. With higher moments of a PSD, greater
weighting is given to higher frequencies. The number of zero crossings E[0] is usually the number of
mean crossings as the mean is non-existent in the PSD.
(ii) The bandedness can be described using the auto-covariance functions which is defined using the
Inverse Fourier Transform of the auto-spectral density (PSD).
(iii) The correlation between two random processes can be described using the cross-covariance
functions which is defined using the Inverse Fourier Transform of the cross-spectral densities
(CPSD).
413
Second Edition
(iv) The correlation between two random processes can be described using the coherence function. The
coherence represents the degree of correlation between two random processes. Two uncorrelated
events show zero coherence where as two fully correlated events show unit coherence. The coherence
function is defined below as a ratio of the cross-power spectral density function to the geometric mean
of the two auto-power spectral density functions.
(v) The RMS of the time signal is the square root of the area under the PSD, defining the intensity of the
signal. If the mean of the PSD has been removed, the RMS (√m0) is equal to the standard deviation.
The mean is almost always removed in dynamic analysis and is dealt with statically.
(vi) The peak amplitude of the random signal used to generate the PSD is approximately 3 to 4.5 times the
RMS. This is because the amplitude distribution of a narrow or broadband signal is Gaussian. Hence,
the peak range is approximately 6 to 9 times the RMS.
414
Second Edition
4.6.4.6 MSC.NASTRAN Random Analysis Methodology
In random forcing functions, the instantaneous magnitude is not known at any given time. Random vibration
excitations include that from earthquake ground motions, wind, ocean waves, acoustic excitations and jet engine
noises. A power spectral density (PSD) function defines these random excitations. Frequency response analysis is
used to generate transfer functions [H(ω)], which are the ratio of the output to the unit inputs. The input PSDs are
then multiplied to the square of these transfer functions [H(ω)] to form response PSDs.
The double sided PSD response to a double sided PSD excitation is
whilst a single sided PSD response to a single sided PSD excitation is
If two processes are correlated then the sequencing effect of the two processes may act to either increase or
decrease the overall effects. Thus, the input PSDs must be in the form of auto- and cross-spectral density
functions. The double sided and single sided PSD computations are as follows, respectively.
The auto- and cross-power spectral density functions may be expressed in matrix form, this permits the rapid
calculation of responses using matrix algebra. The auto-power spectral values are located along the leading
diagonal while the cross-power terms are located in the remaining cells.
Hence the single sided PSD computation is as follows.
415
Second Edition
To get the transfer function into the correct units for a PSD analysis the response parameter (per unit input loading)
has to be squared. This is because the units of PSDs are units of interest squared, per hertz. If one takes the example
of an offshore platform the input loading is typically expressed as a sea state spectrum. The process which this PSD
defines is the sea surface elevation profile. In the time domain this is the sea surface elevation variation with time.
The units of the input PSD are therefore given as m2/Hz (in SI units). Since the response parameter of interest is
stress (or strain) the output PSD is usually expressed as MPa2/Hz. The units of the transfer function are therefore
given as (MPa/Hz)2.
Most of the computational time is spent in solving the structural model. In the time domain, the structural model is
solved for each time history of input; hence two load cases would take twice as long to calculate as one. In the
frequency domain the linear transfer function is only calculated once, hence two load cases take little more time to
analyze than one, and each additional load case can be done virtually instantaneously. The structural calculation is
effectively separated from the response analysis when working in the frequency domain.
The output from a random response analysis consists of the response PSD, auto-covariance functions, number of
zero crossings with positive slope per unit time and RMS values of the response.
416
Second Edition
417
Second Edition
418
Second Edition
4.7 GL, ML Implicit (Real) Modal Transient Response Analysis
The solution can be used to ascertain the modal properties of the system by performing a time domain impulse
analysis to excite the modes of interest. The duration of the impulse must be sufficiently long to excite the first
fundamental mode, which is usually of concern. This would result in a response that includes the first fundamental
mode and most likely higher modes as well. The first fundamental mode is readily ascertained from inspection of
the response time history curve at any node. Higher natural frequencies can also be ascertained by performing an
FFT on the response curve.
(a) Deterministic non-periodic short duration impulse (a.k.a. blast) loading functions with subsequent
wave propagation
(b) Random non-stationary short duration impulse loading functions
The force amplitude does not repeat itself regularly but rises from zero to a series of maxima and minima until
settling down to a constant value. The starting transient is significant and so the solution is carried out in the time
domain. Estimates of the induced stress in a linear elastic body due to an impulsive blast may be made easily in
some cases with a simpler static method of analysis. Section 4.7.4 describes this concept further.
If the forcing function is a random non-stationary forcing function such that the random forces start from a low-
level building up to a maximum then dying away, such as in a seismic event, then exact solution methods are not
established. Instead, we could either analyze a set of such events using deterministic transient solution methods and
then average or envelope the results or alternatively use the crude response spectrum method which envelopes the
response spectra of a series of time histories.
In this LINEAR TIME DOMAIN solution, the static response must be added to the dynamic response if the
dynamic analysis is performed about the initial undeflected (by the static loads) state with only the dynamic loads
applied, hence causing the dynamic response to be measured relative to the static equilibrium position. Hence, the
total response = the dynamic response + the static response to static loads.
Alternatively, in this LINEAR TIME DOMAIN solution, if the dynamic analysis is performed with the
deflected static shape as initial input and the static loads maintained throughout the dynamic excitations, the total or
absolute response (static and dynamic) is obtained straight away from the dynamic analysis. Hence total response
= dynamic response (which already includes the static response to static loads).
With the knowledge of the modal frequencies and corresponding mode shapes, the coupled system of simultaneous
dynamic equilibrium equations can be uncoupled by premultiplying the dynamic equation of motion by [Φ]T as
shown below. This means that the simultaneous ODEs no longer need to be solved simultaneously and so the
MDOF system of equations is reduced to a SDOF system of equations, which can be solved independently of each
other. The computational benefit comes from not having to run a rigorous simultaneous equation solver. The
knowledge of the modal frequencies and the corresponding mode shapes are a prerequisite to this implicit modal
transient response analysis, hence the implicit real (note not complex) eigenvalue analysis must be performed first.
Because of the fact that the modes are real and do not take into account the explicit elemental (viscous) damping
within the structure, the coupled ODEs cannot be uncoupled by [Φ]T. The system of coupled ODEs remains in the
existence of viscous damping and the simultaneous equation solver must be invoked. The only difference then
between SOL 112 and SOL 109 is the fact that the former solves the equations in the modal coordinates instead of
the physical coordinates. Hence, as long as sufficient modes are included (to represent both the static and dynamic
response of the system), SOL 112 will give the same solution as SOL 109 even with large values of viscous
damping. We know that large values of elemental damping will modify the mode shape and frequencies. However,
419
Second Edition
a SOL 112 can still be performed because a true (real) modal approach is not undertaken, instead the coupled ODEs
are solved using a direct approach, but in the modal coordinates. However, the use of the FREQ4 card, which bases
the excitation frequencies to be solved for on the real natural frequencies may prove to be insufficient. This is
because with high values of elemental viscous damping, certain local modes can be totally eliminated. For instance,
viscous dampers with high coefficients of damping on cables can considerably alter the natural frequency of the
local mode and even eliminate a local mode altogether. In this case, the FREQ4 card will not capture the response
at the damped natural frequency. Hence, these damped natural frequencies need to be known (by performing a SOL
107) before choosing the excitation frequencies to be solved for using FREQ2 cards. To reiterate, SOL 112 reverts
to a direct solution technique (akin to SOL 109) when there is either viscous or structural element damping as the
equations of motion cannot be orthogonalized. But the unknowns are still the modal responses and not the physical
responses. And because with damping the modes are really complex modes, there is greater difficulty in capturing
all the response using the real modes. Hence, even more modes are thus required to capture the response accurately
in SOL 112 with element damping especially if the elemental damping is high enough to cause significant complex
modes. Thus if elemental damping is high and the modes are complex, the direct method SOL 109 may be more
appropriate. If a true modal approach is intended for the solution of coupled ODEs with elemental viscous
damping, then a complex modal forced transient response analysis is necessary, although this is quite impractical.
The modal matrix from the free, undamped vibration analysis
[Φ ] = [{φ}1...{φ}i ...{φ}n ] for the n modes
The coupled system of ODEs are given by
[M ]{&
u&( t )} + [K ]{u ( t )} = {P( t )}
Let {u ( t )} = [Φ ]{ξ( t )}
{ }
[M ][Φ ] &
ξ&( t ) + [K ][Φ ]{ξ( t )} = {P( t )}
Premultiplying by [Φ ]T reduces the coupled system of ODEs to a system of uncoupled ODEs
[Φ ]T [M][Φ ] & { }
ξ&( t ) + [Φ ]T [K ][Φ ]{ξ( t )} = [Φ ]T {P( t )}
Hence the generalised mass matrix and the generalised stiffness matrix for the entire system is
the diagonal modal (generalized) mass matrix, [M] = [Φ ] [M ][Φ ]
T
T
[ ]
the diagonal modal (generalized) stiffness matrix, [K] = [Φ ] [K ][Φ ] = ωn [M]
2
the modal (generalized) force vector, {P(t)} = [Φ ] {P( t )}

T
The generalized mass matrix and the generalized stiffness matrix are diagonal because of
the orthogonality condition of the normal modes
{φi }T [M ]{φ j } = 0 if i≠ j
{φi }T [K ]{φ j } = 0 if i≠ j
And because these matrices are diagonal, the equations become uncoupled.
Accordingly, the generalized mass solitary term and the generalized stiffness solitary term
associated with a particular mode ' i' are
Mi = {φi }T [M ]{φ i }
K i = {φi } [K ]{φ i } = ω2ni Mi
T
The uncoupled system of equations are thus

[M] & { }
ξ&( t ) + [K ]{ξ( t )} = {P(t)}
These are a set of SDOF ordinary differential equations
M& ξ&( t ) + K ξ ( t ) = P (t) for the i th mode
i i i i i
The central difference numerical integration of the uncoupled equations are then trivial
ξ&n =
1
(ξ n +1 − ξ n −1 )
2 ∆t
ξ&n = 2 (ξ n +1 − 2ξ n + ξ n −1 )
& 1
∆t 420
Second Edition
and replacing into the dynamic equation of motion averaging the applied force over 3 adjacent time steps
1
Mi (ξ n +1 − 2ξ n + ξ n −1 ) + 1 K i (ξ n +1 + ξ n + ξ n −1 ) = 1 (Pn +1 + Pn + Pn −1 )
∆t 2 3 3
Collecting terms and making ξ n +1 the subject
A1ξ n +1 = A 2 + A 3ξ n + A 4 ξ n −1
1 1
A1 = Mi + K i
∆t 2 3
1
A 2 = (Pn +1 + Pn + Pn −1 )
3
2 1
A 3 = 2 Mi − K i
∆t 3
1 1
A 4 = − 2 Mi − K i
∆t 3
Once individual modal responses are computed {ξ(t)}, the physical response is thus
{u(t)} = [Φ ]{ξ( t )}
Since the numerical integration is performed on a small number (as not all the modes are usually included) of
uncoupled equations, there is not a large computational penalty for changing ∆t as there is in direct transient
response analysis. A constant ∆t is still recommended.
In modal transient response analysis, mode truncation refers to not utilizing all the natural modes in computing the
response of the structure. At a minimum all the modes that have resonant frequencies that lie within the range of
the forcing frequencies have to be retained. For better accuracy, all the modes up to at least 2 to 3 times the highest
forcing frequency should be retained. For example, if a structure is excited between 200 and 2000 Hz, all modes
from 0 to at least 4000 Hz should be retained as the forcing frequencies still excite the higher modes although not
resonating with them i.e. off-resonant excitation. It is thus necessary to evaluate the frequency content of the
transient loads and determine the frequency above which no modes are noticeably excited. Truncating high-
frequency modes truncates high frequency response. The recommendation of using modes up to 2 or 3 times the
highest excitation frequency assumes that the static response can be captured adequately using this finite number of
modes. Clearly, if the distribution of applied loads is multiple concentrated forces, then the finite number of modes
may still not be sufficient to capture the difficult static shape. In this case, it may be prudent to use static residual
vectors instead of increasing the number of vibration modes solely to capture the static response.

ii. structural damping Specified but converted to viscous
II. modal damping
ii. stiffness proportional damping Specified but converted to viscous
If explicit viscous damping element contributions are made to the damping matrix [C] or if elemental structural
damping is specified, then the damping stiffness matrix cannot be diagonalized by the modal matrix. In this case
the modal transient response analysis solves the still coupled problem using a direct transient approach but in terms
421
Second Edition
of the modal coordinates {ξ(t)} instead of the physical coordinates {u(t)}. Since the number of modes used in a
solution is typically much less than the number of physical variables, using the coupled solution of the modal
equations is less costly than using physical variables.
Elemental viscous damping makes contributions to the [C] matrix.

[Φ ]T [M ][Φ ]{&
ξ&( t )}+ [Φ ] [C][Φ ]{ξ&( t )}+ [Φ ] [K ][Φ ]{ξ( t )} = [Φ ] {P( t )}
T T T
Elemental structural damping will modify the damping matrix as follows
[Φ ]T [M ][Φ ] & { } T
ξ&( t ) + [Φ ] [C] +
1
ω

{ }
G E [ K E ][Φ ] ξ&( t ) + [Φ ] [K ][Φ ]{ξ( t )} = [Φ ] {P ( t )}
∑ T T
 4 
where the parameter ω4 converts the structural damping into equivalent viscous damping as the transient response
analysis does not permit the use of complex coefficients.
Stiffness proportional global viscous damping modifies the dynamic equilibrium equations as follows
[Φ ]T [M ][Φ ]{&
ξ&( t )}+ [Φ ] [C ] + { }
 
[ K ][Φ ] ξ&( t ) + [Φ ] [K ][Φ ]{ξ( t )} = [Φ ] {P ( t )}
T G T T
 ω3 
Hence, with elemental viscous, elemental structural and global structural damping, the uncoupled system of ODEs
are given by
[Φ ]T [M][Φ] & { } 
ξ&( t ) + [Φ ]T [C] +
1
ω4 ∑
G E [K E ] +
G
ω3

{ }
[ K ][Φ ] ξ&( t ) + [Φ ]T [K ][Φ ]{ξ( t )} = [Φ ]T {P( t )}
 
The fundamental structural response is solved at discrete times, typically at fixed integration time steps ∆t.
Using a central finite difference representation for the velocity and acceleration,
{ξ& }= 21∆t {ξ
n n +1 − ξ n −1 }
{&ξ&}=
n
1
{ξ n +1 − 2ξ n + ξ n −1}
∆t 2
 
1
[Φ]T [M][Φ ]{ξ n +1 − 2ξ n + ξ n −1} + 1 [Φ]T [C] + 1 ∑G E [K E ] +
G
[K ][Φ ]{ξ n +1 − ξ n −1 }
∆t 2
2 ∆t  ω4 ω3 
[Φ] [K ][Φ]{ξ n +1 + ξ n + ξ n −1} = 1 [Φ]T {Pn +1 + Pn + Pn −1}
1 T
+
3 3
Collecting terms and making {ξ n +1 } the subject
[A1 ]{ξ n +1} = [A 2 ] + [A 3 ]{ξ n }+ [A 4 ]{ξ n −1}
 1   1 
[A1 ] = [Φ ]T  [M ] + 1 [C] + 1 ∑G E [K E ] +
G
[K ] + [K ][Φ ]
 ∆t
2
2 ∆t  ω4 ω3  3 
[A 2 ] = 1 [Φ]T {Pn +1 + Pn + Pn −1}

3
[A 3 ] = [Φ ]T  2
[M ] − 1 [K ][Φ ]
 ∆t
2
3 
   1 
[A 4 ] = [Φ]T − 1
[M] + 1 [C] + 1 ∑G E [K E ] +
G
[K ] − [K ][Φ ]
 ∆t
2
2∆t  ω4 ω3  3 
422
Second Edition
The modal transient response analysis solves the still coupled problem using a direct transient approach but in
terms of the modal coordinates {ξ(t)} (modal responses in modal space) instead of the physical coordinates {u(t)}.
A constant ∆t is obviously computationally beneficial. Hence, if discrete damping is desired, direct transient
response analysis is recommended.
If however only viscous modal damping ζi is specified, the generalized damping matrix [Φ]T[C][Φ] remains
diagonal and so the uncoupled equations of motion can be maintained. The uncoupled equations of motion become
M&iξ&( t ) + (ζ 2M ω )ξ& ( t ) + K ξ ( t ) = P (t)
i i i ni i i for the i th mode
i i
which is solved for the individual modal responses ξi(t) using the Duhamel’s Integral
 ξ& ( τ = 0) + ξ i ( τ = 0)ζ i ω ni 
ξ i ( τ = t ) = e −ζ i ωni t  ξ i ( τ = 0) cos ω di t + i sin ω di t 
 ω di 
1 τ =
Pi ( τ)e −ζ i ωni ( t − τ ) sin ω di (t − τ )dτ
t
+
M i ω di ∫τ = 0
where ω di = ω ni 1 − ζ i2
If structural modal damping Gi is specified, it is converted to an equivalent viscous modal damping

ζi = G i / 2
423
Second Edition
4.7.3 Capability of A Finite Number of Modes To Model The Static and Dynamic Response of Structure
First and foremost, the chosen modes must cover and extend beyond the excitation frequency range such
that both the resonant response of the modes within the range and the off-resonant response of the modes
beyond (from say a 1/3rd of lowest excitation frequency to 3x the highest excitation frequency determined by
FFT as frequency content not obvious) the range are captured. This will sufficiently model the dynamic
response. Considerations then must be made for the finite number of modes to capture the static response.
Modal truncation can be specified by delimiting the number of modes used in the response calculations from that
calculated by EIGRL. To delimit the natural modes employed, LFREQ (lower limit of the frequency range),
HFREQ (upper limit of the frequency range) or LMODES (number of lowest modes retained) can be used.
To determine if enough modes have been selected to represent the static response of the structure, a dynamic
load curve ramped up gradually from zero to a constant value can be applied to a SOL 112 and the final static
equilibrium response after all the dynamic amplification effects have subsided can be compared to the static
response from a SOL 101 solution. Often, if the finite number of modes is found to be capable of representing the
static response, then they will usually be found to be sufficient to represent the dynamic response as well.
To determine if enough modes have been chosen to represent the static and dynamic response of the structure, a
SOL 112 solution can be compared to that of a SOL 109 and the response time history traces compared.
The relative contribution of each mode to the total static and dynamic response can also be determined. This is
known as the modal responses, i.e. the value of the modal variables in the modal solution scheme. The Case
Control Cards SDISP, SVELO and SACCE will produce the modal solution set output, {ξi(t)}. These are plots of
the modal response (for each mode) in terms of time, i.e. the time domain modal response. That is to say,
SDISP(PUNCH) (or SVELO or SACCE) will output one value for each mode at each time step. These are the
modal responses in modal space. They must be multiplied by the corresponding mode shapes in order to obtain the
modal responses in physical space i.e.
{ui(t)} = {φi}ξi(t)
Another method of determining the modal contribution of individual modes to a particular excitation is by using the
modal strain energy. Firstly, to evaluate the ability of the natural modes to represent the static response, a SOL 101
is run with the amplitude of the dynamic loads applied as a static load and the results are written to a DMIG file
using the alter pchdispa.v2001. Then a SOL 103 us run with the DMIG included and also the alter modevala.v2001
to ascertain how well each and every mode can represent the static solution. The strain energy for each mode can
be compared to the strain energy in all the modes calculated and also the input vector. Note that the eigenvector
scaling must be set to the default MASS (not MAX) for this alter to be valid. Secondly, to evaluate the ability of the
natural modes to represent the dynamic response, the alter mtranea.v2001 is utilized for SOL 112.
Note that the capability of a finite number of modes to represent the static and dynamic response of the structure is
limited to a particular force excitation direction and distribution. If the force changes its location or direction,
then the prominence of the different modes which will be different. This is simply because changing the location or
direction of the force will cause a different set of modal forces and hence a different level of excitation of the
different modes. The capability of a finite number of modes to represent the static and dynamic response of the
structure depends also on the level of elemental structural (although cannot be accounted for exactly in the time
domain) and elemental viscous damping present within the system. This is because, the level of elemental damping
affects the complexity of the modes, hence possibly requiring more real modes if the modal complexity is high.
Thus damping should be included when performing the study to determine the required number of modes.
The above method assumes that the direct solution SOL 109 is exact and hence we only have to match that using a
certain number of modes. However, there is an instance when the solution from the direct approach SOL 109
is inaccurate. This occurs when there is elemental structural damping. This problem does not occur in the
424
Second Edition
frequency domain and the approach of comparing the modal estimate to the correct direct solution can be always
made. It can also always be made in the time domain if the only form of damping is viscous. However, time
domain solutions cannot model structural damping exactly, hence having to convert the structural damping into
equivalent viscous damping. But this conversion ties the equivalence to one natural frequency (PARAM, W3 or
PARAM, W4). Hence the damping will only be accurate for the mode with the natural frequency corresponding to
(PARAM, W3 or PARAM, W4), that to only at that excitation frequency, but then again damping is most critical at
resonance. But the fact of the matter is that the direct solution will not be accurate when there is structural damping.
Hence, noting that the direct solution is not a good benchmark to measure against, a modal approach must be used.
Employing SOL 112, a solution would be to insert modal damping estimates based on a SOL 107 calculation.
Hence different modes will be damped accurately (but again not at all excitation frequencies, this usually being an
acceptable inaccuracy). The following graph shows the modal structural damping for a bridge with a floating track
slab resting on isolation pads.
The graph below shows significant high frequency response when modal damping (with no elemental structural
damping) is applied in a SOL 112 solution compared to a highly attenuated high frequency response in a SOL 109
direct solution which incorporates equivalent viscous damping for elemental structural damping tied in at the
frequency of the first mode. Thus clearly, a modal approach must be used when structural damping is present.
Alternatively of course, a direct time domain analysis can be performed if Rayleigh damping (which damps two
modes accurately and interpolates for the modal damping within the range) is incorporated.
425
Second Edition
But let us go with the modal solution. Now since no comparison to a direct approach can be made, the verification
the sufficiency of the chosen number of modes becomes difficult. A solution may be to run repetitive modal SOL
112 analysis (of course with the modal damping from SOL 107 incorporated, but no elemental structural damping
achieved by simply excluding PARAM, W3 and/or PARAM, W4) with increasing number of modes until
convergence of the results occurs. But the question then becomes, does the results converge to the true solution? It
would then be prudent to compare the modal results with gradually increasing number of modes with the SOL 109
solution with ‘tied in’ equivalent viscous damping, bearing in mind that we would expect to see high frequency
response in the modal solution. The following graphs show such a comparison.
A significant observation can be made by looking at these graphs. Although the chosen modes cover and extend
beyond the excitation frequency range such that both the resonant response of the modes within the range and the
off-resonant response of the modes beyond the range are captured, clearly something is amiss for there to be such a
difference in the response. Now if the chosen modes cover the excitation frequency range adequately, the only
reason for there to be any inaccuracy in the modal solution is if the modes still (for whatever reason) are not
sufficient to capture the static response. This can occur if the distribution of the force is such that the static response
(i.e. the static deflected shape of the structure to the applied loads) is too complicated for it to be represented by the
dynamic eigenvectors. In the above example, the dynamic eigenvectors were not sufficiently enough to capture the
static response of a passing train on a bridge. Because of the nature of the load distribution being concentrated
loads applied at certain closely spaced intervals, the static response is clearly a wave-like shape of a low
wavelength. Imagine the static response of the bridge to the train passing to be the train stationary at intervals along
the bridge. The graph above did not have sufficient modes to capture this somewhat difficult shape that can
possibly be captured by higher frequency modes. This proves to be correct and the comparison is shown below
where the SOL 112 solution with modes up to 200Hz seem to converge to the correct solution.
426
Second Edition
Clearly then, instead of laboriously calculating modes of such high frequency to capture the static response, surely
it is better to use static residual vectors instead that capture the static response straight away. Indeed! So long as the
dynamic modes are chosen to cover and extend beyond the excitation frequency range (say 2x or 3x the highest
excitation frequency determined by FFT for time domain loading functions as frequency content not always
obvious) such that both the resonant response of the modes within the range and the off-resonant response of the
modes beyond the range are captured, it is highly recommended to append the static residual vectors to the total
response. Static residual vectors (PARAM, RESVEC, YES) can be calculated except when using the seismic
large mass method for enforced motion. The residual vector method is more efficient than the mode acceleration
method and can be applied to both superelements and the residual structure when substructuring is employed.
Clearly though, there should be sufficient modes comfortably beyond within the excitation frequency bandwidth to
capture the dynamic response, and the static residual vectors should only be used as a final step to append the
quasi-static responses of high frequency (relative to the excitation frequencies) modes. There is no question of
damping associated with these static vectors, as by definition they are the static response of high frequency modes
i.e. the response of high frequency modes to low (relatively that is) frequency excitation. The response then is
quasi-static and by definition independent of the damping of the mode. The effect (i.e. the no amplification
response or rather the quasi-static response) of these truncated high frequency modes can thus be approximated by
residual vectors. These vectors are by default created using the applied loads and solving for the static response in a
static solution. The following graph shows the effect of using these static residual vectors in the above train passing
problem.
Clearly, the true solution was obtained using modes up to just 50Hz with PARAM, RESVEC, YES included. Even
the SOL 112 solution with 100Hz (without RESVEC) was still not able to capture the true response, but is moving
in the right direction since as shown modes up to 200Hz may just be sufficient to capture the static response. Hence
RESVEC is highly recommended. Only when the static response is adequately captured will derived quantities
from the response be accurate. For instance, modal damping estimates from signal filtering the response (to only
include the mode of interest and doing a logarithmic decrement calculation) will only be accurate when the static
response is adequately captured. There are of course much better methods of computing the modal damping.
Note that SOL 112 reverts to a direct solution technique (akin to SOL 109) when there is either viscous or
structural element damping as the equations of motion cannot be orthogonalized. But the unknowns are still the
modal responses and not the physical responses. And because with damping the modes are really complex modes,
there is greater difficulty in capturing all the response using the real modes. Hence, even more modes are thus
required to capture the response accurately in SOL 112 with element damping especially if the elemental damping
is high enough to cause significant complex modes. Thus if elemental damping is high and the modes are complex,
427
Second Edition
the direct method SOL 109 may be more appropriate although of course modal damping cannot be utilized and
hence there is a genuine difficulty in modelling structural damping accurately.
The convergence of average stress values is quite similar to the convergence of velocities4. However, for structures
with any form of stress concentrations, it is not the average stress that is of concern, but the peak stresses. These
involve small local regions of high strain energy with low relative velocities around the stress concentration. It
follows from the consideration of the Rayleigh quotient that such behavior will be associated with high frequency
modes and the low frequency ones will not excite the stress concentrations very strongly. Hence, if any form of
condensation (reduced number of modes, Guyan reduction, dynamic substructuring or large time steps that filter
high frequency modes in implicit time integration schemes) is used to calculate the dynamic response, then this will
filter out the peak stresses. This condition arises when the stresses are determined directly from the displacement
response. The peak stresses will be under-estimated even if mesh refinement was undertaken, since the error is
directly related to the degree of condensation of the high frequency modes and not upon the mesh density. The user
can test the accuracy of the dynamic stress recovery process by simulating the static response in the dynamic
solution (zero frequency excitation for the frequency domain or dynamic relaxation for time domain). This can then
be compared to the stress distribution produced directly from a true static analysis. If the comparison is good, then
the dynamic stress recovery procedure is verified.
We shall discuss the methods of improving the modal solution accuracy. We shall discuss the
I. matrix method or the mode displacement method
II. mode acceleration method
III. mode truncation augmentation method i.e. the static residual RESVEC method (MT)
The dynamic equilibrium equation is presented.

[M ]{&
u&( t )} + [C]{u&( t )} + [K ]{u ( t )} = {P( t )} = {P0 }P( t )
The applied loading is composed of two parts, {P0} is the invariant spatial portion and P(t) is the time varying
portion.
The matrix method (default) (PARAM, DDRMM, 1) computes displacements and stresses per mode and then
computes physical displacements and stresses as the summation. Cost is proportional to number of modes. Since
the number of modes is usually much less than the number of excitation frequencies (or time steps in the time
domain), the matrix method is usually more efficient. The mode displacement method (PARAM, DDRMM, −1)
computes the total physical displacements for each excitation frequency (or time step in time domain) from the
modal displacements, and then computes the element stresses from the total physical displacements. Cost is
proportional to the number of excitation frequencies (or time steps in time domain).
[M]{&u&( t )} + [C]{u&( t )} + [K ]{u ( t )} = {P( t )}
Let {u ( t )} = [Φ ]{ξ( t )}
{ }
[M][Φ ] & { }
ξ&( t ) + [C][Φ ] ξ&( t ) + [K ][Φ ]{ξ( t )} = {P( t )}
Premultiplying by [Φ ]
T
ξ&( t ) + [Φ ] [C][Φ ] ξ&( t ) + [Φ ] [K ][Φ ]{ξ( t )} = [Φ ] {P( t )}

[Φ ]T [M ][Φ ] & { } T
{ } T T
These equations are solved for {ξ( t )} as a set of SDOF systems if the damping matrix can be orthogonalized,
otherwise directly using a simultaneous equation solver. Finally the physical response is recovered as follows.
{u(t)} = [Φ ]{ξ( t )}
{u&(t)} = [Φ ]{ξ&( t )}
u&(t)} = [Φ ]{&
{& ξ&( t )}
4
428
Second Edition
A key concept of the matrix method or the mode displacement method is that the displacement, velocity and
acceleration modal responses were obtained from equations which were decoupled (or attempted to be
decoupled) by pre-multiplication by {Φ}T. The load vector was also pre-multiplied by {Φ}T. This clearly thus
limits the representation of the applied loading to be dependent on the chosen number of dynamic modes. The
choice of the number of modes retained is typically driven by the need to span the frequency content of interest.
That is, the frequency of the highest mode retained should sufficiently exceed the frequency content of the applied
time history by a predetermined margin (say 2x or 3x highest excitation frequency). However, this criterion only
addresses the time dependent portion of the applied loading, P(t) and ignores the spatial portion {P0}. These result
in accuracies especially if the spatial distribution of the loading is concentrated and repetitive such that the lower
dynamic modes have difficulty in capturing the response. The truncated spatial portion of the applied loading due
to the finite number of dynamic modes can be quantified as follows. The exact spatial loading is {P0}. To obtain the
modal representation of the spatial loading, the static equation must be considered.
The static equation
[K ]{u} = {P0 }
Let {u} = [Φ ]{ξ}
[K ][Φ ]{ξ} = {P0 }
To obtain {ξ}, premultiplying by [Φ ]T
[Φ ]T [K ][Φ ]{ξ} = [Φ ]T {P0 }
[Φ ]T {P } [Φ ]T {P0 }
{ξ} = T 0 =
[Φ ] [K ][Φ ] {ω 2 }
Hence, on substituti on
[Φ ] {P0 }
T
[K ][Φ ] 2 = {P0 }
{ω }
{ }
But from eigenvalue problem [K ][Φ ] = [M ][Φ ] ω 2 , hence the modal representation of spatial load
[M ][Φ ]{ω 2 }[Φ ] {2P0 } = {P0 }

T
{ω }
[M ][Φ ][Φ ]T {P0 } = {P0 }
We conclude that the truncated part of the spatial portion of the applied load is
{PT } = {P0 } − [M ][Φ ][Φ ]T {P0 }
Clearly, as the number of modes is increased, the truncated part {PT} becomes smaller. However, the number of
modes required for an accurate solution can become significant, possibly negating the computational advantages
gained by the modal truncation method.
Mode acceleration method (PARAM, DDRMM, −1 and PARAM, MODACC, 0) is a method of improving the
modal solution in the time or frequency domain. A much better estimate of the peak stress can be obtained using
the mode acceleration method. Here the acceleration and velocity response is first obtained. The modal solutions
are expanded to analysis set vectors and multiplied by the mass, damping and direct input matrices to generate
equivalent loading vectors. These vectors are added to the applied load function to generate a pseudo load matrix
for all selected frequencies (or time steps in the time domain). The static problem is then solved using a static
analysis procedure. The stresses are found from solving this static problem. The mode acceleration method
considers higher modes and hence gives more accurate answers than the matrix method or the mode displacement
method especially if the number of retained modes is small in comparison to the number of DOFs. The accuracy of
the dynamic stress distribution will then be comparable to that of a static analysis. The method works because the
high frequency modes that define the stress concentration have a constant response over the low frequency
excitation range that has been considered for the dynamic calculation, and since the stresses are found from an
429
Second Edition
instantaneous static sum, the constant component of the high frequency response have been included. In other
words, the higher modes respond in a quasi-static manner to lower frequency excitations. Hence, at lower
frequency excitations, the inertia and damping forces contain little contribution from higher modes. Also, the
relative accelerations around the stress concentration are low and all that is required is a reasonably accurate
estimate of the overall structural accelerations. This will be given by the lower modes 5. The overall performance
and accuracy of the mode acceleration method falls somewhere between the standard modal output and the
expensive direct solution method. It is then of course not cost-effective when only the peak displacements are
important.
The logic of the mode acceleration method is clear, if the number of modes retained accurately spans the frequency
range of interest, any loading represented by the non-retained modes will produce a quasi-static response.
Consequently, the response due to the non-retained modes will have no dynamic amplification. That is to say, the
modes not retained will cause no appreciable velocity or acceleration response and hence the velocity and
acceleration response can be obtained using the matrix or mode displacement method whilst the displacement
response is obtained using a more direct approach.
From
[Φ ]T [M ][Φ ]{&
ξ&( t )}+ [Φ ]T [C][Φ ]{ξ&( t )}+ [Φ ]T [K ][Φ ]{ξ( t )} = [Φ ]T {P( t )}
In modal acceleration method,
The modal velocity and acceleration response is determined as before
damping need not be specified for
{u&(t)} = [Φ ]{ξ&( t )} the higher unretained modes as the
u&(t)} = [Φ ]{&
{& ξ&( t )} displacement response is
independent of damping of the
However, the displacement response is obtained directly from higher unretained modes, but of
−1 −1
{ }
{u(t)} = [K ] {P( t )} − [K ] [M ][Φ ] ξ(t ) − [K ] [C][Φ] ξ(t )
&
& −1 & { }
course dependent on damping of
retained modes.
A key concept of the mode acceleration method is that although the velocity and acceleration modal
responses were obtained from equations which were decoupled (or attempted to be decoupled) by pre-
multiplication by {Φ}T with the load vector also pre-multiplied by {Φ}T, the displacement response was
obtained directly from the equilibrium equation without pre-multiplication by {Φ}T. This is done because it
is assumed that there is no appreciable velocity or acceleration response due to the applied loading from the
unretained modes, but there will be an appreciable quasi-static displacement response due to the applied
loading from the unretained modes. Hence not only are modal coordinates used to determine the modal
velocity and acceleration responses, but the contribution of velocity and acceleration in the direct
displacement response expression is also in modal terms as shown above.
Mode truncation augmentation method i.e. the static residual RESVEC method (PARAM, RESVEC, YES or
PARAM, RESVINER, YES) is an excellent method of improving the modal solution in the time or frequency
domain. It attempts to correct for the inadequate representation of the spatial loads in the modal domain by creating
additional “pseudo eigen” or static residual vectors to include in the modal set for the response analysis. The
terminology of “pseudo eigen” is used because the static residual vectors are orthogonal to on the mass and
stiffness matrices but do not satisfy the eigenvalue problem. The mode truncation vectors are created using a
mathematically consistent Rayleigh-Ritz approximation where the assumed Ritz basis vectors are derived using the
spatial force truncation vector {PT} presented above. The mode truncation vectors are orthogonal to the retained
eigenvectors since the force truncation vector does not contain any components of the retained eigenvectors. For
the response solution the mode truncation vectors and associated Rayleigh-Ritz frequencies are appended to the
retained eigenvectors and the modal response analysis proceeds as f the augmented vector set were all eigenvectors.
A mode truncation vector is first determined by solving for the displacement vector {X}
[K]{X} = {PT}
5
430
Second Edition
Form,
[K ] = [X] [K ][X]
T
[M ] = [X] [M][X]
T
and solve the reduced eigenvalue problem

[K ]{Φ } = [M ]{Φ }ω
R R
2
S
Finally, the static residual vectors can be determined from

{Φ S } = {X}{Φ R }T
These static residual vectors are simply appended to the retained modal set for the response calculations. There will
be one static residual vector for each spatial load vector, i.e. one for each time step.
Finally, the static residual vectors can be determined from

{
{Φ AUGMENTED } = Φ RETAINED DYNAMICMODES + {Φ S } }
[M]{&u&( t )} + [C]{u&( t )} + [K ]{u ( t )} = {P( t )}
Let {u ( t )} = [Φ ]{ξ( t )}
{ }
[M][Φ ] & { }
ξ&( t ) + [C][Φ ] ξ&( t ) + [K ][Φ ]{ξ( t )} = {P( t )}
Premultiplying by [Φ ]
T
[Φ ]T [M ][Φ ] & { } { }
ξ&( t ) + [Φ ] [C][Φ ] ξ&( t ) + [Φ ] [K ][Φ ]{ξ( t )} = [Φ ] {P( t )}
T T T
These equations are solved for {ξ( t )} as a set of SDOF systems if the damping matrix can be orthogonalized,
otherwise directly using a simultaneous equation solver. Finally the physical response is recovered as follows.
{u(t)} = [Φ ]{ξ( t )}
{u&(t)} = [Φ ]{ξ&( t )}
u&(t)} = [Φ ]{&
{& ξ&( t )}
PARAM, RESVEC, YES augments static residual vectors due to the applied loads (one residual vector for each
time step). PARAM, RESVINER, YES augments static residual vectors due to inertial loads i.e. unit accelerations
of mass (6 residual vectors created for inertial loads in the 6 DOFs). RESVINER is not as good as RESVEC unless
the loading is gravitational loads. The Rayleigh-Ritz frequencies are printed in the .f06 file. These frequencies will
be higher than those of the real dynamic modes. Modal augmentation vectors by PARAM, RESVEC, YES are must
be used for modal methods (in the time or frequency domain) with enforced motion. This is because since there no
rigid body modes (as they are constrained by the enforced motion), there can be no motion of the enforced points
unless RESVEC is used.
A key concept of the mode truncation method is that the truncated force captured by the static residual
vectors include dynamic effects from the non-retained modes, including velocity and acceleration effects.
This is unlike the mode acceleration method which does not consider the velocity and acceleration response
of the unretained modes, only the displacement response. The mode truncation method attempts to average
in a consistent mathematical sense the response of all the modes not retained into a single static residual
vector (for each load case or time step) which contributes to the static displacement and the dynamic velocity
and acceleration response. The mode acceleration method forces the higher unretained modes to respond
only statically. Hence the mode acceleration method is a subset of the mode truncation method. Also, since
dynamic response is accounted for, unlike the mode acceleration method, damping must be specified for the
higher unretained modes in the mode truncation method. This effect should however be small as sufficient
dynamic modes (say 2x or 3x highest excitation frequency) should be requested to capture the amplified
response where damping really matters.
431
Second Edition
A highly illustrative concept is the modal response concept. This can be punched using SDISP, SVELO or
SACCE. These are really the plots of the solution set. Below is a plot of the dynamic modal responses without the
static residual vectors multipliers. Note that the eigenvectors were normalized using MAX, thus the plot shows the
significant modes. These plots will be meaningless if MASS normalization was used.
The following graph then shows the solution set responses including both the dynamic modal responses and the
static residual vectors multipliers (although the comparison should only be made if the method of eigenvector
normalization is consistent). Clearly the static residual vectors are quite significant in this particular case.
Another method of determining the adequacy of the finite number of modes is to evaluate the cumulative effective
mass (NASTRAN Case Control Command MEFFMASS) of the chosen number of modes. The effective mass
has got a specific meaning in seismic analysis, but can be used for other dynamic analyses as well as a measure of
determining the adequacies of the finite number of modes. A cumulative effective mass that approaches unity
suggests adequacy of the chosen modes to model the spatial distribution of the loading. This parameter of course
does not say much about the adequacy of the chosen modes to model the frequency content of the loading.
Essentially, and to reiterate, the chosen number of modes must be sufficient to model both the frequency content
and also the spatial distribution of the loading. It is found that for a high cumulative effective mass, uniformly
distributed loads such as in seismic analyses require only a few modes whereas a concentrated patch requires more
modes and finally a highly concentrated load requires a much greater number of modes to capture the effect of the
spatial distribution of the loading.
432
Second Edition
4.7.4 Concepts of Equivalent Static Force
In large structural engineering projects, it may be more convenient to derive appropriate equivalent static forces for
the dynamic effects of certain types of excitations. Codes of practice usually derive equivalent static loads from
dynamic considerations for application in linear static analyses of large structural engineering finite element
models. This may be used for instance in the impact analysis of a train in the design of an underground station. The
impacting train imposes an impulse I = F∆t = m∆v onto the structure, where m and ∆v are known. Knowing that
F∆t is the area under the impulse curve, making an estimate of the shape of the impulse curve and the duration ∆t,
we can thus estimate the peak amplitude, p0. Hence, the impulse curve is defined. Now, we know that the true
dynamic response is given for mode i as
p p
ξ i ( t ) = D i ( t ) 0i = D i ( t ) 2 0i
Ki ω ni M i
{u i ( t )} = {φ i }ξ i ( t )
To derive an equivalent static response to a dynamic excitation we need to make the assumption that the
DYNAMIC AMPLIFICATION and the SHAPE of the response are governed primarily by the
FUNDAMENTAL MODE. Let us illustrate this concept. A set of static equilibrium equations can be transformed
from physical coordinates into modal coordinates by the same methods transforming dynamic equilibrium
equations into modal coordinates. This is described in Section 3.1.4. If ALL the modes are included, then there will
be the same number of modal DOFs to the physical DOFs and the computational problem size is exactly the same.
The response will also be exactly the same between the physical model and the modal model. This concept is also
demonstrated when we observe the 0.0 Hz (or close to) point on the frequency response function (FRF) of a SOL
108 and SOL 111 analyses. The SOL 108 uses all the modes (because it solves the frequency domain dynamic
equilibrium equations in the physical coordinates) whilst SOL 111 employs only the user-selected modes. Hence, a
SOL 108 FRF a 0.0 Hz (assuming no structural damping) would give the same response as a static analysis SOL
101, whilst a SOL 111 would not. As more modes are employed the SOL 111 result will approach that of the true
static response. These concepts are presented in Section 4.3.3. Now we know that the static response will include
all the modes. So, what about the dynamic amplification? Because the method of solution of a set of static
equilibrium equations is direct (and not modal), different modes cannot be amplified uniquely. We are thus
resolved to amplifying all the modes by the same dynamic amplification factor, Di(t). We choose the
FUNDAMENTAL MODE because it is features most prominently in the static response by virtue of having the
largest p0i/Ki term as higher modes will have larger modal stiffness Ki terms. This is another way of simply saying
that is because the static deformed shape usually somewhat resembles that of the fundamental mode because the
static response of higher modes are much smaller. Hence the dynamic amplification D1(t) is based upon the ratio of
the duration of the impulse, ∆t with respect to the period of the fundamental period, T1. And thus we can estimate
the maximum dynamic amplification D1max. The equivalent modal static force will thus be D1maxp0i and a linear
static analysis is subsequently carried out with loading of D1maxp0 (where p0 is the amplitude of the applied dynamic
force) to approximate the dynamic response.
Response Spectrum
2.5
1.5
Dimax
0.5
0
0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 4 4.5
td/Ti
433
Second Edition
Reiterating, performing an equivalent static analysis to approximate the dynamic response makes the assumption
that the DYNAMIC AMPLIFICATION of ALL the modes is based upon that of ONLY the FUNDAMENTAL
MODE and hence ignoring the POTENTIALLY LARGE AMPLIFICATIONS OF HIGHER MODES.
Even if the highest amplification factor MAX[Dimax] considering all modes i (note that the amplification factor
is theoretically limited to 2.0) were to be employed, it is not necessary that the static solution will always be safe.
This is because, due to the fact that all the modes have to be amplified by the same amplification, the SHAPE of
the response will be governed by the fundamental mode (due to its lowest Ki term). The familiar higher mode
rippled shape (which may certainly cause greater stressing in some elements) will not be observed as that would
require a greater amplification of a particular higher mode and not (the fundamental mode and) all higher modes,
the consequence of which is a canceling of response that cause the ripple effect. Take for instance the green
triangular impulse loading function of duration td. If td/T1 ≈ 1.0, then the greatest dynamic amplification Di is
observed on the fundamental mode and higher modes observe lower amplifications. The AMPLITUDE and
SHAPE of the response will be governed by the fundamental mode and hence the equivalent static procedure may
be justified. However, if td/T1 is << 1.0, then the greatest amplification Di is observed by some higher mode i which
has td/Ti ≈ 1.0 and not by the fundamental mode. Note that if td/T1 is < 0.2, then the maximum modal response due
to the first mode can be approximated as follows.
τ= t
ξ1 (τ = t ) = h(t - τ) ∫
τ= 0
p( τ)dτ
1 τ= t
ξ1 max =
M1ω n1 ∫
τ =0
φ i p( τ)dτ undamped
1 τ= t
ξ1 max =
M1ω d1 ∫
τ =0
φ i p( τ)dτ damped
where φ i = mod al component at excitation point
The maximum modal displacement response is I/(ωd1M1). The magnitude of the impulse I can be calculated as m∆v
where m is the small mass and ∆v the change of velocity at impact. If there is no rebound ∆v is the approach
velocity. The maximum modal velocity response is approximately I/M1 and acceleration is approximately Iωd1/M1.
Anyway, using the amplification of the fundamental mode to represent the amplification of all modes (in the
equivalent static procedure) will not be conservative. Even if the amplification for this particular higher mode was
used to represent the amplification for all the modes (including the fundamental mode), there is no guarantee that
the stressing of all the elements within the system will be on the conservative side. This is because, as mentioned,
the exclusive amplification of that particular (rippling) mode shape (or eigenvector) which observed the greatest
amplification cannot be made in an equivalent static procedure. Instead the amplification of all the modes with this
single amplification factor causes the ripple effect (which may have caused certain elements to witness greater
stresses) to be ineffectual as a canceling of response occurs. Hence, if td/T1 is << 1.0, the equivalent static
procedure may NOT be safe.
434
Second Edition
4.7.5 Structural Damping in Time Domain Analyses
Direct frequency domain solution SOL 108 can handle both elemental structural and elemental viscous damping
exactly. All modes are correctly damped at all excitation frequencies. Modal frequency domain solution SOL 111
reverts to a direct approach (but in the modal coordinates) when there is either elemental structural or elemental
viscous damping. Clearly, the solution is not exact because of modal truncation. If the number of modes were
increased to equal the number of DOFs, then the solution will be exact as obtained by SOL 108. But if a finite
number of modes less than the number of DOFs are used, then the solution will be approximate. If the modes are
only slightly complex, then the real modes (which are used in SOL 111) can easily capture the true complex modes.
But if the modes are very complex (quantified on the complexity plot), then even more (real) modes are necessary
to capture the true complex modes. In either case, SOL 111 can be used (as it reverts to a direct approach) so long
as the number of modes is sufficient to capture the static and dynamic response accurately.
A further method can be employed if the modes are only mildly complex, i.e. the response calculations can be
performed using SOL 111 with modal damping estimates obtained from SOL 107. SOL 107 can be used to
calculate the modal damping from a model with elemental structural and/or viscous damping. These modal
damping (in structural or viscous form) estimates can be employed within a SOL 111 analysis, but of course
removing the elemental structural and/or viscous damping so not as to double count. SOL 111 in this case will not
revert to SOL 108 as there is only modal damping. Note that the modal damping can be processed as either
structural or viscous damping (according to PARAM, KDAMP). This conversion of modal damping from structural
to viscous and vice versa is actually only perfectly accurate when the frequency of excitation matches the natural
frequency of the mode (at resonance), but of course this is acceptable as only that is the instance when the damping
estimate is most critical. Hence this method will damp the different modes accurately, but not at all excitation
frequencies. The benefit of this approach is only computation speed as the solution can be performed in modal
space using a modal approach. If the modes are found to be complex, then the user can always revert to the direct
SOL 108 which can handle both structural and viscous damper elements accurately anyway.
Time domain solution cannot handle structural damping exactly, only viscous damping. A direct transient analysis
SOL 109 or a modal transient analysis SOL 112 correctly models elemental viscous damping at all modes and at all
excitation frequencies. SOL 109 and SOL 112 however do not model elemental structural damping (specified on
the GE field of the MAT1 card or can be specified also using CELAS or CBUSH) exactly. If structural damping is
specified at the element levels, then the incorrect modal damping will result because the conversion from structural
to viscous damping will only be valid for one modal natural frequency, w4 as specified by PARAM, W4. A solution
may be to use a modal approach. Now, the modal transient response analysis SOL 112 reverts to a direct approach
(but in the modal coordinates) when there is either elemental structural or elemental viscous damping. Clearly, the
solution is not exact because of modal truncation added to the fact that elemental structural damping cannot be
incorporated exactly in a time domain solution. If the number of modes were increased to equal the number of
DOFs, then the solution will be exactly as obtained by SOL 108, but still not exact theoretically due to the incorrect
modelling of elemental structural damping. Certainly, if a finite number of modes less than the number of DOFs are
used, then the solution will be even more approximate. If the modes are only slightly complex, then the real modes
(which are used in SOL 112) can easily capture the true complex modes. But if the modes are very complex
(quantified on the complexity plot), then even more (real) modes are necessary to capture the true complex modes.
In either case, SOL 112 can be used (as it reverts to a direct approach) so long as the number of modes is sufficient
to capture the static and dynamic response accurately, but this still does not correctly model structural damping in
the time domain solution. Modelling elemental structural damping mechanism in the time domain using an
equivalent viscous damping will certainly over-damp higher modes of vibration. A method can be employed if
the modes are only slightly complex i.e. the response calculations can be performed using SOL 112 with modal
damping estimates obtained from SOL 107. SOL 107 can be used to calculate the modal damping from a model
with elemental structural and/or viscous damping. These modal damping (of course internally converted to the
mathematical viscous form irrespective of whether specified as modal viscous damping or modal structural
damping) estimates can be employed within a SOL 112 analysis, but of course removing the elemental structural
and/or viscous damping so not as to double count. SOL 112 in this case will not revert to SOL 109 as there is only
435
Second Edition
modal damping. Note that the modal damping must be processed as viscous damping in this time domain solution.
This conversion of modal damping from structural to viscous and vice versa is actually only perfectly accurate
when the frequency of excitation matches the natural frequency of the mode (at resonance), but of course this is
acceptable as only that is the instance when the damping estimate is most critical. Hence, this modal method SOL
112 offers the advantage of more correctly modelling the elemental structural damping on the different
modes, although the modes are not damped accurately at all excitation frequencies. Since modal damping is
explicitly calculated and applied, all the modes are correctly damped by the elemental structural damping here in
the time domain. Note that this method of employing modal damping is valid only if the modes are only slightly
complex as the modal damping values are applied onto the real modes. If the modes are highly complex, then
elemental structural damping cannot be incorporated exactly in the time domain.
The graph shows two traces, the first obtained from a SOL 109 solution with equivalent elemental viscous damping
for elemental structural damping tied in at the first mode, and the second showing the solution obtained using a
SOL 112 with no elemental damping (hence equations can be orthogonalized) but with modal damping. Clearly,
there is significant response from the higher frequency modes, a feature that will be masked if equivalent viscous
damping and the direct solution were used.
436
Second Edition
4.7.6.1 GL, ML Modal Forced Transient Response Analysis
SOL 112
$ Grid output of displacement, velocity and acceleration with time
$ SORT1 lists the results by time whilst SORT2 lists the results by grid id
VELOCITY(<SORT1/SORT2>,<PRINT,PUNCH,PLOT>) = ALL/<Grid Set ID>
ACCELERATION(<SORT1/SORT2>,<PRINT,PUNCH,PLOT>) = ALL/<Grid Set ID>
OLOAD(<SORT1/SORT2>,<PRINT,PUNCH,PLOT>) = ALL/<Grid Set ID>
$ Grid output of modal responses (in modal space)
SDISPLACEMENT(<SORT1/SORT2>,<PRINT,PUNCH>) = ALL/< Mode Number >
SVELOCITY(<SORT1/SORT2>,<PRINT,PUNCH>) = ALL/< Mode Number >
SACCELERATION(<SORT1/SORT2>,<PRINT,PUNCH>) = ALL/< Mode Number >
$ Analysis Cards
TSTEP = < ID IN TSTEP >
$ XY plot output
OUTPUT(XYPLOT)
XYPUNCH <SDISP/SVELO/SACCE> RESPONSE <subcase>/<Grid ID>(<T1/T2/T3>)
$ BULK DATA
Time Output
Number of
TSTEP ID Every NO1
Steps, N1 Step, ∆t1 Steps
Time Output
Number of
Every NO2
… etc …
The integration time step must be small enough to represent accurately both the variation in the loading and also to
represent the maximum frequency of interest. If a loading has a frequency content of 500 Hz then the time step
should be less than 1/500 s. A very high frequency transient excitation will have very sharp spikes (i.e. very low
period). It is necessary for the integration time step to subdivide this. Another reason is the fact that the solution
algorithm smoothes the force by taking the average of 3 times steps. Hence, it is important to avoid defining
437
Second Edition
discontinuous forcing functions. If the analysis calls for sharp impulses, it is best to smooth the impulse over at
least one integration time step. It is also recommended to use at least 10 solution time steps per period of response
for the cut-off maximum frequency of interest. Hence if the highest frequency of interest is 500 Hz, then the time
step should be 1/(500x10) or smaller. Since the solution algorithm is an implicit time integration scheme, the size
of the time step is limited for accuracy purposes and not for the stability of the scheme, which becomes the
governing criteria in explicit time integration schemes.
Since the numerical integration is performed on a small number (as not all the modes are usually included) of
uncoupled equations, there is not a large computational penalty for changing ∆t as there is in direct transient
response analysis. A constant ∆t is still recommended because an artificial spike occurs each time ∆T is changed,
especially if NOLINi is present.
As for the duration of analysis, it is important that it be long enough such that the lowest flexible mode oscillates at
least through one cycle. So if the first fundamental natural frequency is 0.5 Hz, the duration of analysis should be at
the least 2.0 s.
In both direct and modal transient response analysis, the cost of integration is directly proportional to the number of
time steps. If on one hand, a small time step is required to subdivide the smallest period, a long enough duration of
analysis is required to properly capture long period response. This is so because in many cases, the peak dynamic
response does not occur at the peak value of load nor necessarily during the duration of the loading. A good rule is
to always solve for at least one cycle of response for the longest period mode after peak excitation.
To specify the optional initial displacement and velocity conditions (note that initial accelerations is assumed to be
zero),
IC = < ID OF TIC >

$ BULK DATA
Grid Component Initial Initial

TIC SID
ID Number Displacement Velocity
total response = the dynamic response + the static response to static loads. Time domain dynamic excitation
functions should always be applied from the amplitude of 0.0 (and realistically de-ramped to 0.0 as well). This is
because inherently, the dynamic excitation function has to be extrapolated within the analysis code to be from 0.0.
Hence, that initial jolt should better be representative of reality irrespective of whether load excitations or enforced
motion is being applied.
= dynamic response (which already includes the static response to static loads). Of course, if the transient
dynamic analysis follows a static analysis (by say SOL 101, SOL 106, implicit dynamic relaxation by SOL 129 or
explicit dynamic relaxation), then the dynamic excitation function should be ramped up from the static amplitude
and not from 0.0 (and realistically de-ramped to the static load as well), so that again there would be no jolt
unrepresentative of reality.
438
Second Edition
Applied load excitations are as described in direct forced transient response analysis.
4.7.6.1.2 Nonlinear Transient Load
Nonlinear transient loads are as described in nonlinear forced transient response analysis.
Enforced motion is as described in direct forced transient response analysis.
4.7.6.1.4 Damping
Viscous and structural modal damping is defined as follows. TYPE refers to the type of damping units, i.e. whether
structural damping G (default), critical damping CRIT or quality factor Q. The values of fi and gi define pairs of
frequencies and damping. Straight-line interpolation is used for modal frequencies between consecutive fi values.
Linear extrapolation is used for modal frequencies outside the entered range. ENDT ends the table input.
SDAMPING = < ID IN TABDMP1 >

$ BULK DATA
TABDMP1 ID TYPE
f1 g1 f2 g2 f3 g3 f4 g4
f5 g5 f6 g6 … … ENDT
Because time domain solutions (be it a modal method or a direct method) cannot handle structural damping, an
equivalent viscous damping is required. Hence, if structural damping is specified at the element levels, then the
incorrect modal damping will result because the conversion from structural to viscous damping will only be valid
for one modal natural frequency, w4 as specified by PARAM, W4 (Note that element viscous damping damps
different modes accurately). Hence, if the model has any structural damping, then it should be specified as modal
damping. Modal damping can be calculated using SOL 107 and specified as either modal structural or modal
viscous damping (hence a modal method of analysis i.e. SOL 112 must be used). Of course, the modal damping
will be converted to modal viscous damping for solution in the time domain. This conversion is only perfectly
accurate when the frequency of excitation matches the natural frequency of the mode (at resonance), but of course
this is acceptable as only that is the instance when the damping estimate is most critical. Note that in the frequency
domain, for the modal solution (SOL 111), the modal damping specified will be converted to either modal viscous
or modal structural damping depending on PARAM, KDAMP.
439
Second Edition
4.7.6.2 GL, ML P-∆ (KGA From KEA) Modal Forced Transient Response Analysis
Phase 1
Phase 2
A SOL 112 with a general loading function is undertaken based on [KEA] + [KGA]1 with the k2gg=ktjj statement in
the Case Control Section and the outputted .pch file which contains the ktjj matrix in the Bulk Data. The responses
at this stage represent the P-∆ (KGA From KEA) response to the dynamic excitation.

SUBCASE 1
SUBCASE 2
LABEL = P-∆ Modal Transient Response Analysis
DLOAD = < ID OF TLOAD1 or TLOAD2 >
440
Second Edition
for frequency response analysis, because the static responses contribute only to the zero frequency response. For
linear dynamic response, the static solution can be superimposed after the dynamic solution procedure. The preload
effect is reflected only in the stiffness and the actual static load is omitted in the dynamic response analysis. The total
displacement can be obtained by superposing the static solution to the transient response analysis.
And the stress output is obtained as
441
Second Edition
4.7.6.3 GL, ML P-∆ (KGA From Exact or Approximate KTA) Modal Forced Transient Response Analysis
Phase 1
Phase 2
Phase 3
Phase 4
A SOL 112 with a general loading function is undertaken with the k2gg=ktjj statement in the Case Control Section
and the outputted .pch file which contains the latest ktjj matrix in the Bulk Data. The responses at this stage
represent the P-∆ (KGA From Approximate KTA) response to the dynamic excitation.
442
Second Edition
4.7.7.1 Determination of Maximum Dynamic Displacement for Deterministic Time Domain Loading by
Transforming the Coupled MDOF Linear Undamped ODEs To a Set of Independent (Uncoupled)
SDOF ODEs and Solving the Independent Equations in a Manner Similar to Solving a SDOF ODE
Linear time domain hand methods are capable of analyzing: -
Multi-Modal Response to Deterministic Non-Periodic Short Duration Impulse and Hence Random
Non-Stationary Short Duration Impulse by Enveloping Deterministic Responses
A coupled MDOF system of linear ODEs must be uncoupled to a set of independent SDOF system of linear ODEs
if any feasible hand method computation is to be employed. These independent SDOF ODEs can be solved using
standard techniques of solving SDOF linear dynamic ODEs. The final stage to the analysis is to employ a modal
superposition method to express the total response as a summation of the results from the solution of the individual
modal equations. Note that since the modal frequencies and the corresponding mode shapes are required to
uncouple the coupled MDOF ODEs, the real eigenvalue analysis must be performed first. It was shown that a
system of coupled MDOF ODEs could be reduced to a system of independent SDOF ODEs by employing the
Mi &
ξ&i ( t ) + C i ξ&i ( t ) + K i ξ i ( t ) = Pi (t) for the i th mode
M i = {φ i } [M ]{φ i }
T
C i = ζ i 2M i ω n i
K i = {φ i } [K ]{φ i } = ω 2ni M i
T
Pi (t) = {φ i } {P( t )}
T
modal masses (and hence modal damping and stiffnesses) and the (amplitude of the) modal force. Although the
normalization technique is arbitrary, it is recommended that the normalization employed would facilitate the
calculation of the (amplitude of the) modal force since this is a hand calculation. To facilitate the computation, it is
wise to choose the normalization to be unity at the DOF of application of the external excitation. Either way, the
Pi (t) = {φ i } {P( t )}
T
Had the loading been continuous, a continuous modal force can also be calculated by hand (or a spreadsheet) as
follows
L
Pi (t) = ∫ φ i ( x ){P( x , t )}dx
0
using Duhamel’s integral. For a particular mode i, for a general loading function Pi(t), from SDOF response
analysis, we can establish
Di(t) = dynamic amplification factor in the time domain

Dimax = maximum dynamic amplification factor in the time domain
443
Second Edition
Note that in general, Di(t) is a function of the natural circular frequency ωni2 = Ki/Mi or the damped natural circular
frequency ωd, the time duration of loading td and the general time t. Dimax is a function of the natural circular
frequency ωni2 = Ki/Mi or the damped natural circular frequency ωd and the time duration of loading td. From this,
we can establish the modal responses
ξi(t) = modal displacement response (in modal space) in the time domain, Di(t)(p0i/ Ki)
ξimax = maximum modal displacement response in the time domain, Dimax(p0i/ Ki)
Note that p0i corresponds to the amplitude of the modal loading function Pi(t) and not simply the amplitude of the
loading function {P(t)}, i.e. p0 at any particular node. Of course, if the normalization of the mode was such that it
was unity at the DOF of application of the external force with amplitude p0 then, p0i will be equal to p0.
The dynamic amplification factor can be derived for standard short duration loadings as follows.
Undamped (Unless Specified

Undamped (Unless Specified Otherwise) Otherwise) Maximum
Excitation
Dynamic Amplification Factor of Mode i, Di (t) Dynamic Amplification
Factor of Mode i, Dimax
An Instantaneous Continuous
Di (t) = 1 – cos ωnt Dimax = 2
Constant Force of Amplitude p0
An Instantaneous Rectangular τ < td Di (t) = 1 – cos ωnt τ < td Dimax = 2
Force of Duration td and of  2t − t d −t  td
τ > td D i ( t ) =  − 2 sin ω n sin ω n d  τ > td D i max = 2 sin ω n
Amplitude p0  2 2  2
 sin ω n t 
τ < td D i ( t ) = (1 − cos ω n t ) +
1
 − t 
An Instantaneous Right Angled td  ω
 n  Plot Di (t) versus td/T to
Triangular Force of Duration td
determine maximum response
and of Amplitude p0 τ > td D i ( t ) =
1
(sin ω n t − sin ω n (t − t d )) − cos ω n t
ωn t
τ < td/2 D i ( t ) =
2
(ω n t − sin ω n t )
ωn t d
An Instantaneous Isosceles
Triangular Force of Duration td td/2 < τ < td D i ( t ) =
2
[ω n (t d − t ) + 2 sin ω n (t − t d / 2) − sin ω n t ] Plot Di (t) versus td/T to
and of Amplitude p0 ωn t d determine maximum response
τ > td D i ( t ) =
2
[2 sin ωn (t − t d / 2) − sin ωn t − sin ωn (t − t d )]
ωn t d
1  ω 
(1 − ω )
τ < td D i ( t ) =  sin ωt − sin ωn t 
An Instantaneous Half Sine 2
/ ω2n  ω
 n  Plot Di (t) versus td/T to
Force of Frequency ω and of
ω / ωn determine maximum response
τ > td D i ( t ) = −
(1 − ω ) (sin ω t + sin ω (t − t ))
Amplitude p0
2 n n d
/ ω2n
The above table shows that the maximum dynamic amplification that can be produced is two times the static
displacement! This occurs for the instantaneous applied continuous constant force. The response spectrum
showing the maximum responses from plots of Di(t) versus td/Ti for various td/Ti is presented.
444
Second Edition
Response Spectrum
2.5
1.5
Dimax
0.5
0
0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 4 4.5
td/T i
The response from an impulse is even easier to obtain as the unit impulse function can be brought outside the
integral (i.e. the Duhamel’s or Convolution Integral). The maximum modal response (in modal space) from an
impulse (t1/T < 0.2), can be obtained simply as follows.
τ= t
ξ i (τ = t ) = h(t - τ) ∫τ= 0
p( τ)dτ
1 τ= t
ξ i max =
M i ω ni ∫ τ= 0
φ i p(τ)dτ undamped
1 τ= t
ξ i max =
M i ω di ∫ τ= 0
φ i p(τ)dτ damped
The above expression may seem to differ from the dynamic amplification approach where the denominator
contains the modal stiffness, i.e. modal mass times the square of the natural circular frequency. This is because the
above expression requires the explicit integration of the forcing function. The dynamic amplification approach
differs in the sense that the integral (i.e. Duhamel’s Integral) is already classically integrated to obtain the
expression D(t). Another equivalent interpretation of the above relationship is from the basic consideration of the
conservation of momentum. The impacting particle (of small relative mass compared to mass of structure) imposes
an impulse I onto the structure. The magnitude of I can be calculated as m∆v where m is the small mass and ∆v the
change of velocity at impact. If there is no rebound ∆v is the approach velocity. Conservation of momentum at
impact requires the initial velocity of the structural mass to be I/M. A lightly damped system then displays damped
free vibration with an initial displacement of approximately I/(ωdM), or an initial velocity of approximately I/M or
an initial acceleration of approximately Iωd/M.
And the modal response (in modal space) from a general loading function that cannot be classically integrated can
be obtained by employing a numerical integration technique such as Simpson’s Rule.
1 τ= t
ξ i (τ = t ) =
M i ω ni ∫ τ= 0
φ i p(τ) sin ω ni ( t − τ)dτ
1 τ= t 1 τ= t
= sin ω ni t
M i ω ni ∫ τ= 0
φ i p(τ) cos ω ni τdτ − cos ω ni t
M i ω ni ∫
τ= 0
φ i p(τ) sin ω ni τdτ
445
Second Edition
Once the individual modal responses {ξ(t)} are computed, the physical response can be calculated from
{u(t)} = [Φ ]{ξ( t )}
 u1 ( t )   φ11 φ12   ξ1 ( t ) 
 =  
u 2 ( t )  φ 21 φ 22  ξ 2 ( t )
important to point out that the maximum of the modal responses do not occur at the same time. As shown above,
the exact solution can be obtained by expanding the general u(t) expression to include all the modes considered,
and only then maximised.
(the computerized method of course performs the response calculation at discrete time points as it is not just the
maximum that is of interest). An alternative would be to instead of maximising the physical response, maximise the
modal responses and then only superpose the modal responses for the physical response. This is equivalent to the
response spectrum method (only that the procedure is employed on a deterministic loading function instead of a
random function). The square root of sum of squares (SRSS) of the maximum modal contributions as follows,
depicted for a 2 DOF dynamic system.
 u 1 max   (φ11ξ1 max )2 + (φ12 ξ 2 max )2 

 = 
u 2 max   (φ 21ξ1 max )2 + (φ 22 ξ 2 max )2 
If the modal natural frequencies are too close to each other (within about 10%), then the Complete Quadratic
Combination (CQC), which is based on random vibration theory should be used. These methods of approximating
the maximum multi-modal responses are effectively response spectrum analyses on a deterministic loading
function (as opposed to a non-stationary random loading function which is normally associated with response
spectrum analysis).
The upper limit would be to choose all the eigenvectors to have the maximum modal response at the same time.
This is obtained by multiplying the moduli as follows.
{u ( t )} = [Φ ] {ξ i max }
Often, we need to ascertain other types of response. The modal velocities and accelerations can easily be obtained
by differentiating the {ξ(t)} vector with respect to time t and hence,
{u&( t )} = [Φ ]{ξ&( t )}
u&( t )} = [Φ ]{&
{& ξ&( t )}
Finally, the SRSS superposition, again depicted for the 2 DOF system,
&u&1 ( t )   φ11 φ12  &

ξ&1 ( t ) 
 =  & 
&u&2 ( t ) φ 21 φ 22  ξ&2 ( t )
&
∴
u&1max   φ11& (
ξ&1max ) + (φ
2
&
&
12 ξ 2 max ) 
2
= 
&u&2 max   φ & &
 21ξ1max ( ) + (φ
2
&
&
22 ξ 2 max ) 
2
446
Second Edition
For whatever response be it the displacement, velocity acceleration or force, the individual modal responses should
first be calculated in terms of time t, then maximised, then only combined for the physical response with some
method of superposition. Do not maximise the modal displacement response and base the other responses on that.
It must be understood that the scaling (or normalization) of the normal modes are arbitrary, hence their do not
indicate the response. This means that a different scaling method will yield a different modal (or generalized) mass,
modal stiffness (but same modal frequency) and (amplitude of) modal force. It follows that the modal response ξi(t)
from a particular mode will be not be unique and will be dependent upon how the eigenvectors are scaled.
However, the response in the physical coordinates for each and every mode will be unique irrespective of how the
eigenvectors are scaled. This can be proven just by studying the modal equations above. The equation of dynamic
equilibrium for a mode is given by
Mi &
ξ&i ( t ) + K i ξ i ( t ) = Pi (t)
{φi }T [M]{φi }&
ξ&i ( t ) + {φ i } [K ]{φ i }ξ i ( t ) = {φi } {P( t )}
T T
It is evident that for each mode i, the modal mass Mi, modal stiffness Ki and the amplitude of the modal force p0i is
all dependent upon an arbitrarily scaled eigenvector. The modal frequency ωni2 = Ki/Mi on the other hand is unique
to the mode. It follows that the maximum dynamic amplification factor Dimax is also unique to the mode since it is a
function of the natural circular frequency ωni2 = Ki/Mi and the time duration of loading td. However, the maximum
modal displacement response, ξimax = Dimax(p0i/ Ki) is dependent upon the scaling of the eigenvector. The response
in the physical coordinates {uimax} = {φi}ξimax. Say an eigenvector was to be arbitrarily scaled up by say 3. Hence,
New Mi = 9Mi
New Ki = 9 Ki
New ωni2 = ωni2
New Dimax = Dimax
New ξimax = Dimax 3p0i / (9Ki)
= Dimax p0i / (3Ki)
New {uimax} = 3{φi} ξimax
= 3{φi} Dimax p0i / (3Ki)
= {φi} Dimax p0i / Ki
= {uimax} as before
As a final note, if the eigenvector i was scaled such that its component is unity at the DOF which corresponds to
both the solitary point of application of load and the response, then
{u i max }response point of interest = {φ i }response point of interest ξ i max

As eigenvector term unity at point of interest {φ i }response point of interest = 1.0
{u i max }response point of interest = 1.0ξ imax
1.0D imaxp 0i
=
Ki
As eigenvector term unity at solitary point of application of load p 0i = 1.0p 0
1.0D i max 1.0p 0
{u i max }response point of interest =
Ki
D i max p 0
=
Ki
Since K i = ω2niMi
D i max p 0
{u i max }response point of interest =
ω2niMi
447
Second Edition
The significance of this result is that if the eigenvector i was scaled such that its component is unity at the DOF
which corresponds to both the solitary point of application of load and the response, the physical response due to
the particular mode can be seen to be just proportional to the dynamic amplification Dimax (which is a function of
the excitation frequency and the natural frequency ωni) and the amplitude of the loading function p0, and inversely
proportional to square of the natural frequency ωni and the modal mass Mi. The dynamic displacement response is
then basically the static deflection scaled by the maximum dynamic amplification factor.
Another important significance is that with this normalization technique applied to all the modes, the relative
importance of different modes to a certain force excitation at a certain location can be determined. That is to say, if
all the eigenvectors were scaled such that its component is unity at the DOF which corresponds to both the
solitary point of application of load and the response (using POINT normalization), then the greater the
modal mass, the less important is the mode as the response is inversely proportional to the modal mass.
Unlike natural frequencies, the relative importance of modes is not a structural property. It is dependent upon the
location of the excitation force and the location of the response.
448
Second Edition
A forced response analysis of a shear frame (be it to model a building or water tank) connected by a mass-less
flexible beam is illustrated in MAPLE 7. All units in SI.
u1 u2
P(t)
M 6EI/L3 M
L EI EI L EI EI
P(t)
EI = 560000000
M = 400000
100000 L=4
t
0.64

> restart;
DOF:=2:
EI:=560000000:
M:=400000:
L:=4:
MASS:=Matrix([[M,0],[0,M]]);
# Excitation - Po is the amplitude of the excitation, i.e. P(t)=Po*function of t
P(t):=Matrix([[0],[100000]]);
td:=0.64;
400000 0
MASS :=  
 0 400000
 
262500000 -52500000
KE := 
 -52500000 262500000
 
 0
P( t ) := 
100000
 
td := .64

eig:=0:
eig:=eig,Phi[i,j];
end do;
end do;
end do:
449
Second Edition
Phi:=Phi;
22.91287847 0. 
wn :=  
 0. 28.06243040
 
1 -1
Φ :=  
1 1

1 -1
Φ :=  
1 1

MODALFORCE:=evalf(Transpose(Phi).P(t));
800000. 0. 
 0. 800000.

9
.420000000 10 0. 
MODALSTIFFNESS :=  

 0. .630000000 109
100000.
MODALFORCE := 
100000.
 
Modal Responses ξi = Di(t)Poi/Ki
> D(t):=Vector(DOF):
D(t)[i]:=1-cos(wn[i,i]*t)+1/td*(sin(wn[i,i]*t)/wn[i,i]-t);
end do;
variablelegend:=seq(convert(D[i],string),i=1..DOF):
plot([seq(D(t)[i],i=1..DOF)], t=0..td, D,title="Dynamic Magnification D(t)",
legend=[variablelegend]);
xi:=Vector(DOF):
xi[i]:=D(t)[i]*MODALFORCE[i,1]/MODALSTIFFNESS[i,i];
end do:
xi:=evalf(xi);
D( t ) := 1 − cos ( 22.91287847t ) + .06819309072 sin ( 22.91287847t ) − 1.562500000t
1
D( t ) := 1 − cos ( 28.06243040 t ) + .05567942541 sin( 28.06243040 t ) − 1.562500000 t

2
ξ :=
[ .0002380952381− .0002380952381 cos ( 22.91287847 t ) + .00001623645017sin( 22.91287847 t )
− .0003720238095 t ]
[ .0001587301587− .0001587301587 cos ( 28.06243040 t ) + .883800403210-5 sin( 28.06243040 t )
− .0002480158730 t ]
u(t):=Phi.xi;
450
Second Edition
u( t ) :=
[ .0000793650794− .0002380952381 cos ( 22.91287847t ) + .00001623645017sin( 22.91287847t )
− .0001240079365t + .0001587301587 cos ( 28.06243040t ) − .883800403210-5 sin( 28.06243040t ) ]
[ .0003968253968− .0002380952381 cos ( 22.91287847t ) + .00001623645017sin( 22.91287847t )
− .0006200396825t − .0001587301587 cos ( 28.06243040t ) + .883800403210-5 sin( 28.06243040t ) ]

plot([seq(u(t)[i],i=1..DOF)], t=0..td, Displacement,title="Steady-State Displacement
451
Second Edition
4.7.7.2 Determination of Max Dynamic Displacement for Deterministic Time Domain Support Motion
(Displacement, Velocity or Acceleration) by Transforming the Coupled MDOF Linear Undamped
ODEs (In Relative Terms) To a Set of Independent (Uncoupled) SDOF ODEs (In Relative Terms)
and Solving the Independent Equations in a Manner Similar to Solving a SDOF ODE
Linear time domain hand methods are capable of analyzing: -
Multi-Modal Response to Deterministic Non-Periodic Short Duration Impulse Enforced Motion and
Hence Random Non-Stationary Short Duration Impulse Enforced Motion by Enveloping
Deterministic Responses
For a MDOF system, the equation of motion for support excitation in relative terms is
[M ]{&
u&( t )} + [C]{u&( t )} + [K ]{u ( t )} = −[M ]{1}&
u&s ( t )
Note that {D} = {1} is a unity vector corresponding to the rigid body motion. The support excitation causes all the
masses to produce an inertial force opposing its motion (D’Alembert’s Principle).
This coupled MDOF system could be reduced to a system of independent SDOF ODEs by employing the
Mi &
M i = {φ i }T [M ]{φ i }
C i = ζ i 2M i ω n i
K i = {φ i } [K ]{φ i } = ω 2ni M i
T
Pi (t) = −{φ i }T [M ]{1}&

u&s ( t )
modal masses (and hence modal damping and stiffnesses) and the (amplitude of the) modal force. Note that the
Pi (t) = −{φ i } [M ]{1}&

u&s ( t )
T
using Duhamel’s integral.
ξ&i ( t ) + C i ξ&i ( t ) + K i ξ i ( t ) = −{φ i } [M ]{1}&

Mi& u&s ( t )
T
For a particular mode i, for a general loading function Pi(t), from SDOF response analysis, we can establish

Dimax = maximum dynamic amplification factor in the time domain
Note that in general, Di(t) is a function of the natural circular frequency ωni2 = Ki/Mi or the damped natural circular
frequency ωd, the time duration of loading td and the general time t. Dimax is a function of the natural circular
frequency ωni2 = Ki/Mi or the damped natural circular frequency ωd and the time duration of loading td. From this,
we can establish the modal responses
452
Second Edition
p 0i {φ }T [M ]{1}&
u&0
ξ i ( t ) = D i (t )
= − D i (t ) i 2 &
u&0 = amplitude
Ki ω ni M i
Thus whereby we had the following for the modal response in load excitations
p {φ } {p }T
ξ i ( t ) = D i ( t ) 0i = D i ( t ) i 2 0
Ki ω ni M i
we now have the following for enforced base motion
p 0i {φ }T [M ]{1}&
u&0
ξ i (t) = D i (t) = −D i (t) i 2
Ki ω ni M i
An interesting observation is that whereby for load excitations the amplitude of the forcing vector {p0} may be
sparse with only possibly one point with a value, that for enforced motion is quite different [M]{1} &u&0 with all
components having a value.
Let us also define the modal participation factor for enforced motion as
{φ i }T [M]{1} {φ i }T [M]{1}
Γi = − =−
Mi {φ i }T [M]{φ i }
Hence, the modal response for enforced motion excitations
&
u&0
ξ i ( t ) = D i (t )Γi
ω 2ni
The dynamic amplification factor can be derived for standard short duration loadings as follows.
Undamped (Unless Specified

Undamped (Unless Specified Otherwise) Otherwise) Maximum
Excitation
Dynamic Amplification Factor of Mode i, Di (t) Dynamic Amplification
Factor of Mode i, Dimax
An Instantaneous Continuous
Di (t) = 1 – cos ωnt Dimax = 2
Constant Force of Amplitude p0
An Instantaneous Rectangular τ < td Di (t) = 1 – cos ωnt τ < td Dimax = 2
Force of Duration td and of  2t − t d −t  td
τ > td D i ( t ) =  − 2 sin ω n sin ω n d  τ > td D i max = 2 sin ω n
Amplitude p0  2 2  2
 sin ω n t 
τ < td D i ( t ) = (1 − cos ω n t ) +
1
An Instantaneous Right Angled

 ω − t 
td  n  Plot Di (t) versus td/T to
Triangular Force of Duration td
determine maximum response
and of Amplitude p0 τ > td D i ( t ) =
1
(sin ω n t − sin ω n (t − t d )) − cos ω n t
ωn t
τ < td/2 D i ( t ) =
2
(ω n t − sin ω n t )
ωn t d
An Instantaneous Isosceles
Triangular Force of Duration td td/2 < τ < td D i ( t ) =
2
[ω n (t d − t ) + 2 sin ω n (t − t d / 2) − sin ω n t ] Plot Di (t) versus td/T to
ωn t d determine maximum response
and of Amplitude p0
τ > td D i ( t ) =
2
ωn t d
1  ω 
(1 − ω )
τ < td D i ( t ) =  sin ωt − sin ωn t 
An Instantaneous Half Sine 2
/ ω2n  ωn
  Plot Di (t) versus td/T to
Force of Frequency ω and of
ω / ωn determine maximum response
τ > td D i ( t ) = −
(1 − ω ) (sin ω t + sin ω (t − t ))
Amplitude p0
2 n n d
/ ω2n
453
Second Edition
The above table shows that the maximum dynamic amplification that can be produced is two times the static
displacement! This occurs for the instantaneous applied continuous constant force. The response spectrum
showing the maximum responses from plots of Di(t) versus td/Ti for various td/Ti is presented.
Response Spectrum
2.5
1.5
Dimax
0.5
0
0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 4 4.5
td/T i
Once the individual modal responses {ξ(t)} are computed, the physical response can be calculated from
{u(t)} = [Φ ]{ξ( t )}
 u1 ( t )   φ11 φ12   ξ1 ( t ) 
 =  
u 2 ( t )  φ 21 φ 22  ξ 2 ( t )
important to point out that the maximum of the modal responses do not occur at the same time. As shown above,
the exact solution can be obtained by expanding the general u(t) expression to include all the modes considered,
and only then maximised.
(the computerized method of course performs the response calculation at discrete time points as it is not just the
maximum that is of interest). An alternative would be to instead of maximising the physical response, maximise the
modal responses and then only superpose the modal responses for the physical response. This is equivalent to the
response spectrum method (only that the procedure is employed on a deterministic loading function instead of a
random function). The square root of sum of squares (SRSS) of the maximum modal contributions as follows,
depicted for a 2 DOF dynamic system.
 u 1 max   (φ11ξ1 max )2 + (φ12 ξ 2 max )2 

 = 
u 2 max   (φ 21ξ1 max )2 + (φ 22 ξ 2 max )2 
If the modal natural frequencies are too close to each other (within about 10%), then the Complete Quadratic
Combination (CQC), which is based on random vibration theory should be used. These methods of approximating
the maximum multi-modal responses are effectively response spectrum analyses on a deterministic loading
454
Second Edition
function (as opposed to a non-stationary random loading function which is normally associated with response
spectrum analysis).
The upper limit would be to choose all the eigenvectors to have the maximum modal response at the same time.
This is obtained by multiplying the moduli as follows.
{u ( t )} = [Φ ] {ξ i max }
Often, we need to ascertain other types of response. The modal velocities and accelerations can easily be obtained
by differentiating the {ξ(t)} vector with respect to time t and hence,
{u&( t )} = [Φ ]{ξ&( t )}
u&( t )} = [Φ ]{&
{& ξ&( t )}
Finally, the SRSS superposition, again depicted for the 2 DOF system,
&u&1 ( t )   φ11 φ12  &

ξ&1 ( t ) 
 =  & 
&u&2 ( t ) φ 21 φ 22  ξ&2 ( t )
u&   φ &
& ξ&
∴  1max  =  11 1max
( ) + (φ
2
&
&
12 ξ 2 max ) 
2

&
u&2 max   φ &&
 21ξ1max ( ) + (φ
2
&
&
22 ξ 2 max ) 
2
For whatever response be it the displacement, velocity acceleration or force, the individual modal responses should
first be calculated in terms of time t, then maximised, then only combined for the physical response with some
method of superposition. Do not maximise the modal displacement response and base the other responses on that.
455
Second Edition
4.7.7.3 Determination of Maximum Dynamic Displacement for Deterministic Time Domain Loading by
Transforming the Coupled Distributed System Linear Damped ODEs (from the governing PDE)
To A Set of Independent (Uncoupled) SDOF ODEs and Solving the Independent Equations in a
Manner Similar to Solving a SDOF ODE
In reality, all systems have distributed mass, damping and stiffness properties. The finite element method
discretizes the continuous system with a finite number of degrees of freedom resulting in a set of ordinary
differential equations (ODEs) when Newton’s equation of motion is applied. Continuous systems on the other hand
result in one partial differential equation. Since the integration of the partial differential equation (PDE) is far more
complicated, the modelling of a structure as a continuous system is limited to simple structures. The Bernoulli-
Euler beam equation of motion, which is based on simple bending theory assuming that plane sections remain plane
results in the equation of motion
∂ 4u ∂ 2u
EI + m = P(x, t )
∂x 4 ∂t 2
where u is the transverse displacement. Note that the Timoshenko beam equation extends the Bernoulli-Euler beam
theory to include shear deformations and rotary inertia and should be used if such effects matter. Solving the
corresponding free vibration PDE analytically by the method of separation of variables leads to two ODEs, which
yield the following natural circular frequencies and mode shapes
EI
ω n = a 2 L2 φ( x ) = A sin ax + B cos ax + C sinh ax + D cosh ax
mL4
The values of a and the integration constants depend on the boundary conditions and is presented in Section
4.1.3.4. The orthogonality property for continuous systems can be shown to be essentially similar to that of the
discrete systems. Hence, if for a discrete system the uncoupled equation of motion for the ith mode is
Mi&
ξ&i ( t ) + (ζ i 2M i ω n i )ξ&i ( t ) + K i ξ i ( t ) = Pi (t)
{φi }T [M ]{φi }&
ξ&i ( t ) + (ζ i 2{φ i }T [M ]{φ i }ω n i )ξ&i ( t ) + {φ i }T [K ]{φ i }ξ i ( t ) = {φ i }T {P( t )}
Likewise, the uncoupled equation of motion for the ith mode of a continuous system (in particular that of a beam) is
Mi& ξ&i ( t ) + (ζ i 2M i ω n i )ξ&i ( t ) + K i ξ i ( t ) = Pi (t)
M&
ξ&( t ) + (ζ 2M ω )ξ& ( t ) + ω 2 M ξ ( t ) = P (t)
i i i i ni i ni i i i
 mφ 2 ( x )dx &
L
&   L
 & 2 
L
 L
∫ ∫ ∫ ∫
 ξ i ( t ) + ζ i 2 0 mφ i ( x )dx ω n i  ξ i ( t ) + ω ni  0 mφ i ( x )dx  ξ i ( t ) = 0 φ i ( x ){P( x , t )}dx
2 2
 0 i
where the modal mass, modal damping, modal stiffness and modal force is clearly determined. There will be n
uncoupled ODEs for n natural modes. These are now simply SDOF ODEs, which can be solved using Duhamel’s
integral. For a particular mode i, for a general loading function Pi(t), from SDOF response analysis, we can
establish
Note that in general, Di(t) is a function of the natural circular frequency ωni2 = Ki/Mi, the time duration of loading td
and the general time t. From this, we can establish the modal responses
ξi(t) = modal displacement response in the time domain, Di(t)(p0i/ Ki)
Note that p0i corresponds to the amplitude of the modal loading function Pi(t).
The final step is to obtain the physical displacements u(x,t) from the summation of the n modal responses as
follows. n
∑
u ( x , t ) = φ i ( x )ξ i ( t )
i =1
As a final note, the element stresses (here the bending moments and shear forces) can be obtained from the
Bernoulli-Euler beam equations
∂ 2u ∂ 3u
M ( x , t ) = EI V ( x , t ) = EI
∂x 2 ∂x 3
456
Second Edition
4.8 GL, ML Implicit Direct Transient Response Analysis
wave propagation
The force amplitude does not repeat itself regularly but rises from zero to a series of maxima and minima until
settling down to a constant value. The starting transient is significant and so the solution is carried out in the time
domain. Estimates of the induced stress in a linear elastic body due to an impulsive blast may be made easily in
some cases with a simpler static method of analysis. Section 4.7.4 describes this concept further.
In general, modal transient response analysis is used when

(i) the model is large
(ii) many time steps need to be solved for
On the other hand, direct frequency response analysis is employed when

(i) the model is small
(ii) only a few time steps need to be solved for
(iii) the response due to high frequency excitation is required, as this requires many modes to be computed
in the modal transient response analysis, the computation of the modes being the costly operation in the
modal approach
(iv) high accuracy is required as the direct approach does not involve mode truncation
457
Second Edition
The coupled system of ODEs of the damped vibration equation of motion are given by
[M]{&u&( t )} + [C]{u&( t )} + [K ]{u ( t )} = {P( t )}
The fundamental structural response is solved at discrete times, typically at fixed integration time steps ∆t.
Using a central finite difference representation for the velocity and acceleration,
{u&n } = 1 {u n +1 − u n −1 }
2 ∆t
1
{&
u&n } = 2 {u n +1 − 2u n + u n −1 }
∆t
1
[M ]{u n +1 − 2u n + u n −1 } + 1 [C]{u n +1 − u n −1 } + 1 [K ]{u n +1 + u n + u n −1 } = 1 {Pn +1 + Pn + Pn −1 }
∆t 2
2∆t 3 3
Collecting terms and making {u n +1} the subject
[A1 ]{u n +1} = [A 2 ] + [A 3 ]{u n } + [A 4 ]{u n −1}
[A1 ] =  1
[M ] + 1 [C] + 1 [K ]
 ∆t
2
2 ∆t 3 
[A 2 ] = 1 {Pn +1 + Pn + Pn −1}
3
[A 3 ] =  22 [M ] − 1 [K ]
 ∆t 3 
[A 4 ] = − 1
[M ] + 1 [C] − 1 [K ]
 ∆t
2
2 ∆t 3 
The initial conditions {u 0 } and {u&0 } are used to determine the values of {u -1}, {P0 } and {P-1},
{u -1} = {u 0 } − {u&0 }∆t
{P0 } = [K ]{u 0 } + [C]{u&0 }
{P-1} = [K ]{u -1} + [C]{u&0 }
Direct response analysis involves the solution of coupled simultaneous geometrically linear dynamic equilibrium
equations. The direct transient solution involves decomposing [A1] and applying to the right-hand-side of the
equation. The solution behaves like a succession of static solutions with each time step performing a forward-
backward substitution (FBS) on a new load vector. If ∆t is constant during the entire analysis, the [A1] matrix needs
to be decomposed only once. Each progressive step in the analysis is only an FBS of a new load vector. If ∆t is
changed, [A1] needs to be decomposed again, which can be costly in large problems.

II. modal damping
i. viscous damping No
ii. structural damping No
ii. stiffness proportional damping Specified but converted to viscous
458
Second Edition
Elemental viscous damping makes contributions to the [C] matrix.

[M ]{&
u&( t )} + [C]{u&( t )} + [K ]{u ( t )} = {P( t )}
Elemental structural damping will modify the damping matrix as follows
 
[M ]{&
u&( t )} + [C ] +
1
∑G {u&( t )} + [K ]{u ( t )} = {P ( t )}
E [ K E ]
 ω4 
Stiffness proportional global viscous damping modifies the dynamic equilibrium equations as follows
 
[M ]{&
u&( t )} + [C ] +
G
[ K ]{u&( t )} + [K ]{u ( t )} = {P ( t )}
 ω3 
459
Second Edition
4.8.3.1 GL, ML Direct Forced Transient Response Analysis
SOL 109
SDISPLACEMENT(<SORT1/SORT2>,<PRINT,PUNCH>) = ALL/<Grid Set ID>
SVELOCITY(<SORT1/SORT2>,<PRINT,PUNCH>) = ALL/<Grid Set ID>
SACCELERATION(<SORT1/SORT2>,<PRINT,PUNCH>) = ALL/<Grid Set ID>
$ Analysis Cards
TSTEP = < ID IN TSTEP >
$ XY plot output
OUTPUT(XYPLOT)
$ BULK DATA
Time Output
Number of
TSTEP ID Every NO1
Time Output
Number of
Every NO2
… etc …
The integration time step must be small enough to represent accurately both the variation in the loading and also to
represent the maximum frequency of interest. If a loading has a frequency content of 500 Hz then the time step
should be less than 1/500 s. A very high frequency transient excitation will have very sharp spikes (i.e. very low
period). It is necessary for the integration time step to subdivide this. Another reason is the fact that the solution
algorithm smoothes the force by taking the average of 3 times steps. Hence, it is important to avoid defining
discontinuous forcing functions. If the analysis calls for sharp impulses, it is best to smooth the impulse over at
least one integration time step. It is also recommended to use at least 10 solution time steps per period of response
for the cut-off maximum frequency of interest. Hence if the highest frequency of interest is 500 Hz, then the time
step should be 1/(500x10) or smaller. Since the solution algorithm is an implicit time integration scheme, the size
460
Second Edition
of the time step is limited for accuracy purposes and not for the stability of the scheme, which becomes the
governing criteria in explicit time integration schemes.
It is recommended that the time step not be changed in a linear direct transient analysis. This is because a
decomposition of the dynamic matrix is required each time ∆t is changed and this can be a costly operation. Also, a
constant ∆t is recommended because an artificial spike occurs each time ∆T is changed, especially if NOLINi is
present.
As for the duration of analysis, it is important that it be long enough such that the lowest flexible mode oscillates at
least through one cycle. So if the first fundamental natural frequency is 0.5 Hz, the duration of analysis should be at
the least 2.0 s.
In both direct and modal transient response analysis, the cost of integration is directly proportional to the number of
time steps. If on one hand, a small time step is required to subdivide the smallest period, a long enough duration of
analysis is required to properly capture long period response. This is so because in many cases, the peak dynamic
response does not occur at the peak value of load nor necessarily during the duration of the loading. A good rule is
to always solve for at least one cycle of response for the longest period mode after peak excitation.
To specify the optional initial displacement and velocity conditions (note that initial accelerations is assumed to be
zero),
IC = < ID OF TIC >

$ BULK DATA
Grid Component Initial Initial

TIC SID
ID Number Displacement Velocity
461
Second Edition
To define a time dependent dynamic excitation, both spatial distribution and the time variation (i.e. the temporal
distribution) must be defined.
TLOAD1: {P( t )} = {AF(t − τ)}

t < (T1 + τ) or t > (T 2 + τ)
{P(t )} = 
0 ,
TLOAD2: ~ B C~t ~
 A t e cos(2πF t + P) , (T1 + τ) ≤ t ≤ (T 2 + τ)
~
where t = t − T1 − τ
t = time
A = amplitude scalar multiplier defined by DAREA for a DOF
τ = time delay in an applied load defined by DELAY for a DOF
F(t) = time dependent force variation defined by TABLED1

T1 = time constant defined by T1 in TLOAD2
T2 = time constant defined by T2 in TLOAD2
F = frequency (cycles per unit time) defined by F in TLOAD2
P = phase angle (degrees) defined by P in TLOAD2
C = exponential coefficient defined by C in TLOAD2
B = growth coefficient defined by B in TLOAD2
$ BULK DATA
F(t)
DAREA
TLOAD1 ID DELAY ID TYPE TABLED1
ID
ID
DAREA
TLOAD2 ID DELAY ID TYPE T1 T2 F P
ID
C B
Component Scale Component Scale

DAREA ID GRID ID GRID ID
Number Factor Number Factor
Component Time Component Time

DELAY ID GRID ID GRID ID
Number Delay τ Number Delay τ
TABLED1 ID XAXIS YAXIS
x1 y1 x2 y2 x3 y3 x4 Y4
x5 y5 x6 y6 … … ENDT
462
Second Edition
TYPE is the TLOAD1 and TLOAD2 entries defined the type of excitation, i.e. 0 for Force or Moment.
Any number of DAREA and DELAY entries may be defined. All those with the same ID will be subjected to the
same dynamic excitation defined in the TLOAD1 and TLOAD2 entries. The XAXIS and YAXIS in the TABLED1
entry refers to either LINEAR or LOG interpolation between and beyond the extremities of the specified {xi , yi}
pairs of {time, amplitude}.
Hence to define a force that ramps up and is constant thereafter as shown
P(t)
4.0
t
2.5 5.0
we define for TLOAD1
A = 4.0 in DAREA
τ = 2.5 in DELAY
F(t) in a TABLED1 entry
F(t)
1.0
t
2.5
Hence, using a TABLED1 we can define very general transient force excitations.
To define a sinusoidal harmonic load P(t) = −6.0sin(ω(t−6.7)) with a period T = 0.5s for one cycle (i.e. from t =
6.7s to t = 7.2s),
F(t)
6.0
6.7
t
7.2
T = 0.5s
hence, f = 2.0 Hz
we define for TLOAD2,
A = 6.0 in DAREA
τ = 6.7 in DELAY
T1 = 0.0
T2 = 0.5
F = 2.0
P = 90.0 degrees
C = 0.0 in TLOAD2
B = 0.0 in TLOAD2
463
Second Edition
Hence,
t < (T1 + τ) or t > (T 2 + τ)
{P(t )} = 
0 ,
~ B C~t ~
 A t e cos(2πF t + P) , (T1 + τ) ≤ t ≤ (T 2 + τ)
~
where t = t − T1 − τ
t < 6.7 or t > 7.2
{P(t )} = 
0 ,
6.0 cos(2π2( t − 6.7) + 90.0) , 6.7 ≤ t ≤ 7.2
Since, sin θ = cos (90.0−θ)
t < 6.7 or t > 7.2
{P(t )} = 
0 ,
 − 6.0 sin( 2π2( t − 6.7)) , 6.7 ≤ t ≤ 7.2
In order to verify the applied loading, the response to the load applied suddenly (over one or two time steps) should
be checked to double the results from a static analysis with the same loading.
Defining the spatial distribution using DAREA only enables the specification of dynamic concentrated forces and
moments. To accommodate more complicated loadings, the LSEQ entry is used to refer to static load entries that
define the spatial distribution of the dynamic loads.

LOADSET = < ID OF LSEQ >
DLOAD = < ID OF TLOAD1/TLOAD2 >
$ BULK DATA
DAREA
Static Temp
LSEQ ID Reference
Load ID Load ID
Link
DAREA F(t)
TLOAD1 ID Reference DELAY ID TYPE TABLED1
Link ID
DAREA
TLOAD2 ID Reference DELAY ID TYPE T1 T2 F P
Link
C B
The DAREA Reference Link links the TLOAD1/TLOAD2 entry to the LSEQ which can now be used to refer to
static load set ids which define the spatial distribution of the dynamic loads. The static load set id can refer to one
or more static load entry types. Obviously, there is not a DAREA entry anymore. It is replaced by an LSEQ bulk
data entry, a LOADSET case control entry and the pertinent bulk data static load entries such as FORCE, PLOADi
or GRAV. The time dependent load card TLOAD1/TLOAD2 is selected using the DLOAD case control command.
A new automatic feature will be activated if and only if the user does not have a LOADSET/LSEQ selection. With
the new enhancement, it is no longer necessary for the user to explicitly specify LOADSET/LSEQ combination in
order to employ static loading data in dynamic analysis. Instead, when the user selects a dynamic load, all static
loads and thermal loads that have the same ID as the DAREA ID on the dynamic load entry are automatically
selected.
If more than one TLOAD1/TLOAD2 entry is required, then a dynamic load set combination is required. This is
done using a DLOAD bulk data entry that linearly combines multiple TLOAD1/TLOAD2 entries.
464
Second Edition

DLOAD = < ID OF DLOAD >
$ BULK DATA
Overall
Scale TLOAD1 / Scale TLOAD1 /
DLOAD ID Scale ..etc..
Factor TLOAD2 ID Factor TLOAD2 ID
Factor
Nonlinear transient loads are as described in nonlinear forced transient response analysis.
465
Second Edition
Four methods can be used for enforced motion, namely: -

(i) The direct absolute response approach
(ii) The direct relative response approach
(iii) The indirect large mass method (absolute response approach)
(iv) The indirect large spring method (absolute response approach)
The direct absolute response approach makes no assumptions. The direct relative response approach makes the
following assumptions 6: -
(i) base movements in any given direction are identical i.e. that the base supports cannot move
independently
(ii) no mass or damping coupling between the structure and the ground (the off diagonal terms in the
unsupported mass matrix that couple the structure and the ground movements are zero or are
insignificant)
(ii) no damping into the ground
In both the direct absolute and direct relative approaches, the equation of motion is the same on the LHS, hence the
same resonant frequencies and mode shapes are obtained, only the applied loading vector on the RHS differ. The
two approaches will also give the same stresses within the elements. With the assumption of no coupling of mass
and damping, the absolute response is found by applying a base displacement and the relative response by applying
a base displacement. The absolute displacement response and relative displacement response only differ by a rigid
body movement.
4.8.3.1.3.1 Direct Enforced Motion (Absolute Response Approach)
The direct approach of applying enforced motion is the most accurate method. Denoting the free DOFs as f and the
constrained DOFs (whether with enforced motion or zero constraints) as s, P the force and q the reaction, the
dynamic equilibrium equation can be partitioned as
With zero constraints, i.e.
the dynamic equation of motion reduces to the usual
But, with enforced motion, the dynamic equation of motion is
6
466
Second Edition
Hence, in general the user specifies the either the support displacement, velocity or acceleration (as all three
motions are related to each other in the sense that the velocity is the first derivative and the acceleration is the
second derivative of the displacement) and the equation of motion is solved as usual. But for most structural
problems, the damping component Bsf (not Bss in the reaction expression) can be ignored and for lumped mass
formulations (or at least no coupling to the support freedoms), Msf is zero, hence reducing the equivalent forcing
function to
Pf(t) – Kfs us(t)
and hence, only the base displacement excitation need to be incorporated. However, these approximations need not
necessarily be employed in which case the absolute approach has no inherent assumptions. Note that the response
will be obtained in absolute terms. This solution method is general and is valid even if different supports are
moving with different independent excitations.
4.8.3.1.3.2 Direct Enforced Motion (Relative Response Approach)
The dynamic equation of motion in absolute terms with enforced motion has been shown to be
u&f + Bff u&f + K ff u f = Pf ( t ) − (M sf &

M ff & u&s + Bsf u&s + K fs u s )
Assuming that the base movements in any given direction are identical i.e. that the base supports cannot move
independently (arising in only seismic problems, not any other), the structural movements can be expressed
relative to the base as
u rel = u f − u s
Thus
u&rel + B ff u&rel + K ff u rel = Pf ( t ) − (M sf &
M ff & u&s + B sf u&s + K fs u s ) − (M ff &
u&s B ff u&s + K ff u s )
Using the fact that Kus = 0 and assuming further that the mass and damping are diagonal (or at least no
coupling to the support freedoms), the equation of motion becomes
u&rel + B ff u&rel + K ff u rel = Pf ( t ) − (M ff &

M ff & u&s + B ff u&s )
Assuming further that there is no damping into the ground, we obtain the common form
M ff &
u&rel + B ff u&rel + K ff u rel = Pf ( t ) − M ff &
u&s
The DLOAD Case Control Command, optionally the DLOAD bulk data entry, TLOAD1/TLOAD2, DELAY and
TABLED1 is used in the same way as they were when load excitations were applied. One difference is the TYPE
field of TLOAD1/TLOAD2 where instead of load excitation LOAD, enforced motion in terms of DISP, VELO or
ACCE is specified. Another difference for the direct enforced motion lies in the EXCITEID Field 3 of
TLOAD1/TLOAD2, where instead of referencing a DAREA card (hence not requiring a DAREA card at all for
enforced motion), the EXCITEID Field references an SPCD entry, which in turn will reference a GRID ID and an
associated DOF component in which the enforced motion is to be applied. Now at the same time, in line with
methods of applying enforced motion in static analysis, the DOF component of the GRID ID with enforced motion
must be constrained with an SPC bulk data entry which of course must be referenced by an SPC Case Control
Command. Modal augmentation vectors by PARAM, RESVEC, YES must be used for modal methods. This is
because since there no rigid body modes (as they are constrained by the enforced motion), there can be no motion
of the enforced points unless RESVEC is used.
467
Second Edition
4.8.3.1.3.3 Indirect Large Mass Method (Absolute Response Approach) – Base Acceleration Specified
If a very large mass m0, which is several orders of magnitude larger than the mass of the entire structure, is
connected to a DOF where a dynamic load is applied, then the acceleration of the DOF is approximately
P( t )
&
u&( t ) =
m0
Hence, the (large) force required to produce the desired acceleration at the DOF is
P(t) = m 0 &
u&( t )
The stiffness, damping and the inertial force of the mass of the structure at the DOF contributes little in comparison
to the force provided by the large mass, hence the acceleration response is due primarily to the inertial force of the
large mass. The larger the mass in comparison, the more accurate the acceleration excitation. However the
magnitude is limited by numeric overflow in the computer. MSC recommends that the value of m0 be
approximately 106 times the mass of the entire structure for an enforced translational DOF and 106 times the mass
moment of inertia of the entire structure for a rotational DOF (for 6 digits of numerical accuracy). The
disadvantage of the large mass method is that it involves a loss of numerical conditioning and hence a loss of
accuracy of the response. If the large mass is 106 times the mass of the structure, this is equivalent to losing 6
significant figures in the definition of the mass and stiffness matrices.
The following procedure is employed to specify prescribed motion in forced transient response analysis: -
(i) remove constraints from the enforced DOFs
(ii) place large masses or inertia scalar elements CMASSi or CONMi with values approximately 106
times the mass or mass moment of inertia of the entire structure
(iii) indicate in Field 5 of TLOAD1 or TLOAD2 whether the enforced motion is a displacement,
velocity of acceleration; NASTRAN automatically differentiates a specified velocity once or a
specified displacement twice to obtain an acceleration; Hence, to maintain accuracy, it is best to
specify an acceleration in the first place
(iv) apply a dynamic load to each enforced DOF equal to
P(t ) = m 0& u&( t ) if accelerati on prescribed motion
P ( t ) = m 0 u&( t ) if velocity prescribed motion
P ( t ) = m 0 u ( t ) if displaceme nt prescribed motion
The DLOAD Case Control Command, optionally the DLOAD bulk data entry, TLOAD1/TLOAD2, DAREA,
DELAY and TABLED1 is used in the same way as they were when load excitations were applied. The key
difference is the TYPE field of TLOAD1/TLOAD2 where instead of load excitation LOAD, enforced motion in
terms of DISP, VELO or ACCE is specified.
To ensure that the chosen mass values are high enough two modal analyses (SOL 103) should be run, one with the
enforced DOFs constrained and the other with the large masses attached and the DOFs left unconstrained. The
flexible frequencies (not the rigid mode frequencies) between the two analyses should be well comparable (to
within 4 or 5 significant figures), otherwise the mass values should be increased.
In modal methods, further considerations must be made to the rigid body modes. Globally unconstrained structures
will have rigid body modes. Releasing a global DOF and placing a large mass there to enforce an applied motion
will result in that DOF being unconstrained and hence will result in a rigid body mode (stress free mode). This
mode can safely be discarded in the solution by using LFREQ or simply not calculating it in EIGRL. If however
two large masses are placed at two different locations to simulate enforced motion in the same direction, there will
be a further low-frequency mode that represents the motion of one large mass relative to the other. This mode does
contribute to the stresses are cannot be ignored. It must be captured within EIGRL and LFREQ. To avoid this
problem, a solution will be to place only one large mass at an arbitrary location and connect with RBE2 elements
all DOFs that are to be subjected to that enforced motion.
468
Second Edition
4.8.3.1.3.4 Indirect Large Spring Method (Absolute Response Approach) – Base Displacement Specified
A stiff spring may be used to simulate an enforced displacement.

P(t) = k0 u(t)
where k0 is the stiffness of the stiff spring and u(t) is the enforced displacement. The large stiffness method
certainly works, but the large mass method is preferred because it is easier to estimate a good value for the large
mass than to estimate a good value for the stiff spring. In addition and more importantly, the large mass method is
far superior when modal methods are used. If very stiff springs are used for modal analysis rather than very large
masses, the vibration modes corresponding to the very stiff springs have very high frequencies and in all likelihood,
are not included among the modes used in the response analysis. This is the main reason that large masses should
be used instead of stiff springs.
The stiff spring method is however advantageous in the case of (time domain) enforced displacement because it
avoids the roundoff error that occurs while differentiating the displacement to obtain acceleration in the large mass
method. The stiff spring method also avoids the problem of rigid-body drift when applying enforced motion on
statically determinate support points (Rigid-body drift means that the displacement increases continuously with
time, which is often caused by the accumulation of small numerical errors when integrating the equations of
motion).
4.8.3.1.4 Damping
To specify stiffness proportional global viscous damping on all the deformable elements, the following parameters
are used.
$ BULK DATA
PARAM,G,<Structural Damping Coefficient>

PARAM,W3,<Circular Frequency at which Structural Damping Equals Viscous Damping>
To specify elemental structural damping on selected deformable elements, PARAM, W4 is used in conjunction
with the GE field on the MATi or entries in the CBUSH or CELAS elements to convert the structural damping into
equivalent viscous damping.
$ BULK DATA
PARAM,W4,<Circular Frequency at which Structural Damping Equals Viscous Damping>
If PARAM, W3 and/or PARAM, W4 is not specified, it defaults to 0.0, hence ignoring all the elemental structural
damping cards.
Because time domain solutions cannot handle structural damping, an equivalent viscous damping is required.
Hence, if structural damping is specified at the element levels, then the incorrect modal damping will result because
the conversion from structural to viscous damping will only be valid for one modal natural frequency, w4 as
specified by PARAM, W4 (Note that element viscous damping damps different modes accurately). Hence, if the
model has any structural damping, then it should be specified as modal damping. Modal damping can be calculated
using SOL 107 and specified as either modal structural or modal viscous damping (hence a modal method of
analysis i.e. SOL 112 must be used). Of course, the modal damping will be converted to modal viscous damping
for solution in the time domain. This conversion is only perfectly accurate when the frequency of excitation
matches the natural frequency of the mode (at resonance), but of course this is acceptable as only that is the
instance when the damping estimate is most critical. Note that in the frequency domain, for the modal solution
(SOL 111), the modal damping specified will be converted to either modal viscous or modal structural damping
depending on PARAM, KDAMP.
469
Second Edition
4.8.3.2 GL, ML P-∆ (KGA From KEA) Direct Forced Transient Response Analysis
Phase 1
Phase 2
A SOL 109 with a general loading function is undertaken based on [KEA] + [KGA]1 with the k2gg=ktjj statement in
the Case Control Section and the outputted .pch file which contains the ktjj matrix in the Bulk Data. The responses
at this stage represent the P-∆ (KGA From KEA) response to the dynamic excitation.

SUBCASE 1
SUBCASE 2
LABEL = P-∆ Direct Transient Response Analysis
470
Second Edition
for frequency response analysis, because the static responses contribute only to the zero frequency response. For
linear dynamic response, the static solution can be superimposed after the dynamic solution procedure. The preload
effect is reflected only in the stiffness and the actual static load is omitted in the dynamic response analysis. The total
displacement can be obtained by superposing the static solution to the transient response analysis.
And the stress output is obtained as
471
Second Edition
4.8.3.3 GL, ML P-∆ (KGA From Exact or Approximate KTA) Direct Forced Transient Response Analysis
Phase 1
Phase 2
Phase 3
Phase 4
A SOL 109 with a general loading function is undertaken with the k2gg=ktjj statement in the Case Control Section
and the outputted .pch file which contains the latest ktjj matrix in the Bulk Data. The responses at this stage
represent the P-∆ (KGA From Approximate KTA) response to the dynamic excitation.
472
Second Edition

4.8.4.1 Determination of Maximum Dynamic Displacement, umax by Solving the SDOF Undamped/Damped
Linear Equation of Motion ODE for Deterministic Time Domain Loading With/Without Initial
Conditions Using the Convolution Integral (Duhamel’s integral)
The Duhamel’s integral can be used to calculate the response of SDOF systems to general loading functions. It
inherently includes both the steady state and the transient components of the motion in the response corresponding
to no initial conditions. However, the method is only valid for linear elastic structures as superposition of response
is utilized.
The impulse of a force is defined as the product of the force p(τ) and its duration time dτ. An impulsive force acts
only for a short duration of time. We define time a general time variable τ where
τ = 0 Initial displacement and velocity conditions
τ = τ Time of application of impulsive force for duration dτ
τ = t Time dynamic response sought
p(τ)
dτ
τ τ τ+dτ
t
From Newton’s Laws of Motion, an impulse on a mass m will result in a change of momentum and hence change
of velocity.
mdv = p(τ)dτ
p(τ)dτ
dv =
m
This incremental velocity can be considered as the initial velocity of a free vibrational analysis. Recall the transient
state solution for a free vibrational analysis with initial displacement and velocity conditions.
u&(0)
u(t) = sin ω n t + u (0) cos ω n t
ωn
Hence the response due to the initial velocity dv (with no initial displacement) at time τ at a later time t,
p ( τ) dτ
du (τ = t ) = sin ω n (t − τ )
mω n
We denote the start of the application of the impulsive forces at time τ (for duration dτ) and the response to be
evaluated at time t. A general loading function can be regarded as a series of short impulses at successive
incremental times of dτ, each impulse producing its own differential response at time t. Thus, the total response at t
will be the superposition of all the impulses acting from time τ = 0 to τ = t.
τ= t τ= t p ( τ ) dτ
∫ du ( τ = t )dτ = ∫ sin ω n (t − τ )
τ=0 τ=0 mω n
1 τ= t
u (τ = t ) = ∫ p(τ) sin ω n (t − τ )dτ
mω n τ=0
This is known as the Duhamel’s integral and it inherently includes both the transient state and steady state
components of the response. Because it utilizes superposition of the responses, it is only valid for linear elastic
structural behavior. To also incorporate initial conditions at time τ = 0,
u&( τ = 0) τ= t
p( τ) sin ω n (t − τ )dτ
1
u (τ = t ) =
ωn
sin ω n t + u ( τ = 0) cos ω n t +
mω n ∫
τ=0
473
Second Edition
Including viscous damping, the corresponding expression becomes

 u&( τ = 0) + u ( τ = 0)ζω n  1 τ= t
u ( τ = t ) = e −ζωn t  u ( τ = 0) cos ωd t + sin ωd t  + ∫ p(τ)e −ζωn ( t − τ ) sin ωd (t − τ )dτ
 ωd  mωd τ=0
where ωd = ω n 1 − ζ 2
Hence, the general Duhamel’s Integral expression excluding the initial conditions,
τ= t
u (τ = t ) = ∫
τ=0
p(τ)h ( t − τ)dτ
1
where h(t - τ) = sin ω n ( t − τ) without damping
mω n
1
and h(t - τ) = e − ξωn ( t − τ) sin ω d ( t − τ) with damping
mω d
Incidentally, h(t-τ) is known as the unit impulse response function. Now it is just a matter of evaluating this integral
and expression either classically or numerically for a variety of loading functions to determine the response.
Other quantities such as velocity and acceleration can be obtained simply by differentiating the displacement
expression with respect to t. Sometimes this simply results in a multiplication by ωn (or ωd) for velocity and ωn2 (or
ωd2) for acceleration.
(i) An Instantaneous Impulsive Force of Duration t1 < T
An impulse is a very large load acting for a very short time. So long as t1/T < 0.2, we can approximate the force as
an impulse. The lower the t1/T, the more impulse-like the loading becomes. An impulse analysis is easier because
h(t-τ) can be approximated outside the integral whereas in the non-impulse loading h(t-τ) must be evaluated inside
the integral. The remainder within the integral reduces to simply the area (or impulse) under the loading force p(τ).
τ= t
u ( τ = t ) = h(t - τ) ∫ p(τ)dτ
τ= 0
1 τ= t
u(τ = t) = sin ω n ( t − τ) ∫ p(τ)dτ undamped
mω n τ= 0
1 τ= t
u(τ = t) = e −ξωn ( t − τ ) sin ω d ( t − τ) ∫ p(τ)dτ damped
mω d τ =0
1 τ= t
u max =
mω n ∫τ=0 p(τ)dτ undamped
1 τ= t
u max =
mω d ∫τ=0 p(τ)dτ damped
Another equivalent interpretation of the above relationship is from the basic consideration of the conservation of
momentum. The impacting particle (of small relative mass compared to mass of structure) imposes an impulse I
onto the structure. The magnitude of I can be calculated as m∆v where m is the small mass and ∆v the change of
velocity at impact. If there is no rebound ∆v is the approach velocity. Conservation of momentum at impact
requires the initial velocity of the structural mass to be I/M. A lightly damped system then displays damped free
vibration with an initial displacement of approximately I/(ωdM), or an initial velocity of approximately I/M or an
initial acceleration of approximately Iωd/M.
474
Second Edition
(ii) An Instantaneous Continuous Constant Force of Amplitude p0
p(τ)
p0
τ
τ=t
With no damping,
τ= t 1
u (τ = t ) = ∫ p ( τ) sin ω n ( t − τ)dτ
τ =0 mω n
τ= t 1
=∫ p0 sin ω n ( t − τ)dτ
τ =0 mω n
p0
cos ω n (t − τ) 0
t
=
mω 2n
p0
= (1 − cos ω n t )
k
2p 0
u max = when cos ω n = −1
k
The maximum dynamic displacement is twice the static displacement. This means that a constant force applied
suddenly will produce a maximum displacement of twice that which will be produced if the force was applied
statically (i.e. slowly such that there are no dynamic effects). This is also true for internal forces and stresses.
475
Second Edition
(iii) An Instantaneous Rectangular Force of Duration td of Amplitude p0

p(τ)
p0
τ
τ = td
τ=t
With no damping,
For τ < t d
p0
u (τ = t ) = (1 − cos ω n t )
k
p
u&(τ = t ) = 0 ω n sin ω n t
k
2p
u max = 0
k
For τ = t d
p0
u (τ = t d ) = (1 − cos ω n t d )
k
p
u&(τ = t d ) = 0 ω n sin (ω n t d )
k
For τ > t d , we utilize the initial conditions as at τ = t d , hence replacing t by t − t d
u&(τ = t d ) 1 τ= t
sin ω n (t − t d ) + u (τ = t d ) cos ω n (t − t d ) + p(τ) sin ω n (t − τ)dτ
mω n ∫τ = t d
u (τ = t ) =
ωn
p0 p0
u (τ = t ) = sin (ω n t d ) sin ω n (t − t d ) + (1 − cos ω n t d ) cos ω n (t − t d ) + 0
k k
p0
u (τ = t ) = (cos ω n (t − t d ) − cos ω n t )
k
p 2t − t d − td 
u (τ = t ) = 0
 − 2 sin ω n sin ω n 
 k 2 2 
p t 2t − t d
u max = 2 0 sin ω n d when sin ω n =1
k 2 2
It is found that the maximum dynamic response is a function of ωntd or td/T. For td/T ≥ 0.5, the maximum dynamic
response is the same as it would have been had the force loading been infinite. This means that the maximum
amplification occurs during the application of loading. However, if the loading is very short duration, such that td/T
< 0.4, than the maximum response may occur after the loading, during the subsequent free vibration.
476
Second Edition
(iv) An Instantaneous Right Angled Triangular Force of Amplitude p0
p(τ)
p0
τ
τ = td
With no damping,
For τ < t d
p0  sin ω n t 
u (τ = t ) = (1 − cos ωn t ) + p 0  − t 
k kt d  ωn 
For τ > t d ,
p0
u (τ = t ) = (sin ωn t − sin ωn (t − t d )) − p 0 cos ωn t
kωn t k
As always, a plot of y(t) versus td/T would be very beneficial. For large values for instance in this case, the
maximum dynamic displacement response approaches twice the static displacement value.
(v) An Instantaneous Isosceles Triangular Force of Amplitude p0
p(τ)
p0
τ
τ = td
With no damping,
For τ < t d / 2
2p 0
u (τ = t ) = (ωn t − sin ωn t )
kω n t d
For t d / 2 < τ < t d
u (τ = t ) =
2p 0
[ωn (t d − t ) + 2 sin ωn ( t − t d / 2) − sin ωn t ]
kω n t d
For τ > t d ,
u (τ = t ) =
2p 0
kω n t d
An impacting particle (of small relative mass compared to mass of structure) imposes an impulse I = F∆t onto the
structure. The magnitude of I = F∆t can be calculated as m∆v where m is the small mass and ∆v the change of
velocity at impact. If there is no rebound ∆v is the approach velocity. Knowing that F∆t is the area under the
impulse curve, making an estimate of the shape of the impulse curve and the duration ∆t, we can thus estimate the
peak amplitude. Hence, the impulse curve is defined.
477
Second Edition
(vi) An Instantaneous Half Sine Force of Frequency ω and Amplitude p0
With no damping,
For τ < t d
p0  ω 
u (τ = t ) =  sin ωt − sin ω n t 
(
k 1− ω 2
/ ω 2n )  ωn 
For τ > t d ,
p 0 ω / ωn
u (τ = t ) = − ( (t − t d ))
(
k 1 − ω 2 / ω 2n ) sin ω t + sin ω
n n
An impacting particle (of small relative mass compared to mass of structure) imposes an impulse I = F∆t onto the
structure. The magnitude of I = F∆t can be calculated as m∆v where m is the small mass and ∆v the change of
velocity at impact. If there is no rebound ∆v is the approach velocity. Knowing that F∆t is the area under the
impulse curve, making an estimate of the shape of the impulse curve and the duration ∆t, we can thus estimate the
peak amplitude. Hence, the impulse curve is defined.
(vii) General Piecewise Linear Loading Functions
General piecewise linear functions can be integrated and can be shown to produce response given by the following.
Without damping,
1
u (τ = t ) = (A(t ) sin ωn t − B(t ) cos ωn t )
mωn
τ= t i =n
∑ A(t ) + ∫
ti
where A( t ) = ∫ τ= 0
p(τ) cos ω n τdτ =
i =1
i −1
t i −1
p(τ) cos ωn τdτ
τ= t i= n
∑ B(t ) + ∫
ti
and B( t ) = ∫τ= 0
p(τ) sin ω n τdτ =
i =1
i −1
t i −1
p(τ) sin ω n τdτ
where n is the number of linear segments.

If the loading is segmented piecewise linearly by ∆t i , the loading function within each segment is
∆p i
p(τ) = p( t i −1 ) + (τ − t i−1 ) for t i-1 ≤ τ ≤ t i
∆t i
where ∆p i = p( t i ) − p( t i −1 ) and ∆t i = t i − t i −1
On substituti on into the above integrals, and with integration,
1  ∆p 
A ( t i ) = A ( t i −1 ) +  p( t i −1 ) − t i−1 i (sin ωn t i − sin ω n t i−1 )
ωn  ∆t i 
∆p i
+ [cos ωn t i − cos ωn t i−1 + ωn (t i sin ωn t i − t i−1 sin ωn t i−1 )]
ω 2n ∆t i
1  ∆p 
B( t i ) = B( t i −1 ) +  p( t i −1 ) − t i −1 i (cos ω n t i −1 − cos ωn t i )
ωn  ∆t i 
∆p i
+ [sin ωn t i − sin ωn t i−1 − ωn (t i cos ωn t i − t i−1 cos ωn t i−1 )]
ω 2n ∆t i
The above expressions represent the response at a time during the application of the loading. If the response during
the ensuing free vibration is sought, then the expression must be evaluated at the end point of the loading and the
initial conditions expression must be used.
478
Second Edition
(viii) General Nonlinear Loading Functions
General loading functions that cannot be classically integrated must be integrated numerically using integration
techniques such as Simpson’s Rule.
Without damping,
1 τ= t
u (τ = t ) =
mωn ∫
τ= 0
p( τ) sin ωn ( t − τ)dτ
1 τ= t 1 τ= t
= sin ω n t
mωn ∫τ= 0
p(τ) cos ω n τdτ − cos ωn t
mω n ∫
τ =0
p(τ) sin ωn τdτ
The integrals can be evaluated numerically with Simpson’s Rule which is piecewise parabolic.
h
Integral = (I1 + 4I 2 + 2I 3 + ... + 2I n −2 + 4I n −1 + I n )
3
In order to use Simpson’s Rule effectively, divide the integral functions into segments, within which the function
can be well approximated by a cubic variation. Having three terms I1, 4I2 and I3 is sufficient to model a cubic
function exactly. Thus basically, we segment the integral function into piecewise cubic functions and apply
Simpson’s Rule separately on each segment, summing the results in the end.
The above expressions represent the response at a time during the application of the loading. If the response during
the ensuing free vibration is sought, then the expression must be evaluated at the end point of the loading and the
initial conditions expression must be used.
479
Second Edition
4.8.4.2 Determination of Maximum Dynamic Displacement, umax by Solving the SDOF Undamped/Damped
Linear Equation of Motion ODE (In Relative Terms) for Deterministic Time Domain Support
Motion (Displacement, Velocity or Acceleration) With/Without Initial Conditions Using the
Convolution Integral (Duhamel’s integral)
m&
u&( t )
k(u(t)- us(t))
m
u(t)
c(u&( t ) − u&s ( t ) )
us(t)
In absolute terms, the equation of motion
m&u&( t ) + c(u&( t ) − u&s ( t ) ) + k (u ( t ) − u s ( t ) ) = 0
In relative terms
u r ( t) = u( t) − u s (t )
Hence,
m(& u&s ( t ) ) + cu&r ( t ) + ku r ( t ) = 0
u&r ( t ) + &
m&
u&r ( t ) + cu&r ( t ) + ku r ( t ) = − m& u&s ( t )
Note that in absolute terms, we need the support displacement and velocity in the equation of motion whilst in
relative terms we need only the support acceleration in the equation of motion. This resulting equation of motion
above is similar to that which considers time domain force loading p(t), and thus can be solved in exactly the same
manner taking
p(t ) = − m&
u&s ( t )
The response will be obtained in relative terms as follows.
With damping,
1 τ= t
u r (τ = t ) =
mωd ∫ τ =0
p(τ)e −ξωn ( t − τ) sin ωd ( t − τ)dτ
1 τ= t
= ∫ u&s (τ)e −ξωn ( t − τ) sin ωd ( t − τ)dτ
− m&
mωd τ =0
1 τ= t
=
ωd ∫τ= 0
u&s (τ)e −ξωn ( t −τ ) sin ωd ( t − τ)dτ
−&
τ= t
MAX  u&s (τ)e −ξωn ( t −τ ) sin ωd ( t − τ)dτ
1
u r max (τ = t ) =
ωd  ∫τ= 0
&

1
= Sv
ωd
where S v = pseudo spectral velocity
480
Second Edition
4.9 GNL, MNL Implicit and Explicit Direct Transient Response Analysis
wave propagation
(c) Projectile (a.k.a. impact) excitations with subsequent wave propagation (Explicit Analysis Only)
(d) Brittle snap or redundancy check excitations (Explicit Analysis Only)
In blast, impact and brittle snap problems, the force amplitude does not repeat itself regularly but rises from zero to
a maximum or a series of maxima until settling down to a constant value. The starting transient is significant and so
the solution is carried out in the time domain.
In this NONLINEAR TIME DOMAIN solution, the static response must be added to the dynamic response if the
Alternatively, in this NONLINEAR TIME DOMAIN solution, if the dynamic analysis is performed with the
481
Second Edition
4.9.2 Deterministic Non-Periodic Short Duration Impulse (a.k.a. Blast) Loading Functions With
Subsequent Wave Propagation
Estimates of the induced stress in a linear elastic body due to an impulsive blast may be made easily in some
cases with a simpler static method of analysis. Section 4.7.4 describes this concept further.
Key wavefront parameters are

ps peak overpressure
Ts positive phase duration
is specific impulse (area under pressure-time curve)
ta arrival time of blast wave
These are well established

Rankine-Huginot 1870
W = charge weight R = distance from charge
Blast wave scaling laws

R1/R2 = (W1/W2)1/3
Scaled distance Z = R/W1/3
Spherical airburst – baseline condition and Hemispherical surface burst – typical condition for terrorist attack.
482
Second Edition
4.9.3 Projectile Crash (a.k.a. Impact) (and Impulsive Blast) Analysis With Subsequent Wave Propagation
A projectile crash analysis involves the specification of an initial velocity. Hence the a structure is given an initial
momentum. The motion is then subsequently retarted when it impacts another elastic body. The impulse (i.e. force)
generated depends on the duration taken to retard the momentum, i.e. the impulsive force is the change in
momentum divided by the duration. This duration is a function of the stiffness of the elastic body. This is
essentially the difference between a projectile crash analysis and a blast analysis, the latter of which has a
predefined impulsive force which is independent of the stiffness of the retarding elastic body. Now a
consequence of the fact that the force in a projectile analysis being dependent upon the stiffness of the elastic body
is that the result of the analysis is very much dependent upon the assumptions made of these stiffnesses. A blast
analysis presents a predefined impulsive force and the response of the different modes of the structure is simply
dependent upon the predefined magnitude of the impulsive force and the dynamic amplification (which is
dependent upon td/Ti where td is the duration of the impulse and Ti the period of the mode, noting that the
theoretical maximum dynamic amplification is only 2.0). Now on the other hand, a projectile impact analysis does
not predefine the magnitude of the impulsive force. It just defines the momentum. The impulsive force is the
change of momentum divided by the duration of the impulse. A stiff retarting structure will offer a short retarding
duration and hence resulting in large internal force magnitudes. The impulsive dynamic amplification will still be at
most 2.0, but the magnitude of the force could be quite considerable. Hence the definition of the stiffness of the
structure retarding the motion is of paramount importance in any projectile impact analysis.
Any projectile crash will set off a wave propagation. (Note that an impulsive blast will also set off a wave
propagation). As the wave propagates through the structure, parts of the structure that are initially at rest are
suddenly forced into motion as the wavefront passes. The highest frequency wave that can be propagated depends
upon the distance between consecutive nodes. If the highest frequency to be propagated is f Hz and the wave
velocity is v m/s, then the wavelength is λ = v/f. There should be at least 4 nodes over this wavelength for the wave
to propagate 7. (Another way of looking at this concept is when stresses resulting from an impulsive blast is to
be obtained using modal methods, of course limited to linear analyses; in order for stresses originating from
high excitation frequencies to be captured, the mesh has got to be sufficiently fine to represent the higher
natural modes as they are the ones that will be amplified the most). A uniform mesh of elements that have all
sides of the same length will allow waves to propagate equally in any direction. If a change in mesh density is used
within the model, then this gives rise to a change in the effective numerical impedance where the mesh density
changes. A fine to coarse mesh transition acts as a filter for the high frequency waves that can be transmitted by the
fine mesh but not by the coarse mesh. Hence, spurious high frequency internal wave reflections occur back into the
fine mesh at these mesh density changes. Hence a uniform mesh is paramount to wave propagation problems.
Wave propagation analysis is performed using an explicit time integration scheme with the time step slightly less
than the time is takes the wavefront to travel between two adjacent nodes. If the time step is longer than that, there
is an effective truncation of the highest frequency that can be propagated, and if shorter then an excessive amount
of computation is carried out unnecessarily. Condensation techniques that truncate high frequency modes of the
structure should NOT be used for wave propagations problems. Although high frequency modes of the equations of
motion have no physical meaning that are important numerically for wave propagation problems, if they are not
included then the wavefront gets dispersed and ceases to be as sharp as they should be. Hence it can be concluded
that unlike other dynamic analysis problems, higher modes of vibration is paramount in wave propagation
problems (i.e. projectile impact and impulsive blast analysis).
Strain-rate effects often are important for projectile crash (and impulsive blast for that matter as that is also a
form of wave propagation problem) analysis. The Cowper-Symonds rules are a common simplified method of
accounting for strain-rate effects in a MNL solution. Strain-rates will affect the stress-strain curve in a number of
ways, namely
7
483
Second Edition
I. The ‘static’ (i.e. low strain-rate, about 1E-6) stress-strain curve is modified by the Cowper-Symond
factor (which is completely defined by the parameters C and P), i.e. a higher strain-rate yields higher
stress values.
II. The ultimate failure strain is also dependent upon the strain-rate, i.e. a higher strain-rate causes a lower
failure strain.
III. The Cowper-Symond values itself are strain dependent.
For S275 and S355 steel, typical Cowper-Symond C and P parameters are as follows.
These result in the following Cowper-Symond factors.
However, the strain-rate of the material during testing must also be taken into account. This occurs because the
strain-rate at the necking area is greater than elsewhere. (Note that we have already taken the fact that the necking
area is smaller in the derivation of the ‘static’ stress-strain curve, this being the engineering stress-strain to the true
stress-strain conversion). The following enhancement factors would be applicable for the standard test rates for
“static tests”.
The absolute strain-rate enhancement, taking the test rate into account, is presented in the table below.
For the S275 and S355 carbon steels the failure true strain of 19.9% is derived from the basic tensile test on a
standard test coupon. This elongation is measured over the whole test specimen and is therefore not representative
of the actual strain in the necked region of the test specimen. The strain in the necking region is based on the
reduction in cross-sectional area of the specimen at the necking point. Unfortunately, this is not usually measured
during the standard tensile test, but is typically about 50-60% for these carbon steels.
484
Second Edition
BS 6399-1 specifies accidental vehicle impact loads as follows.
485
Second Edition
4.9.4 Brittle Snap or Redundancy Check Excitation
A brittle snap or redundancy check analysis include the analysis of sudden fracture of structural members from the
static equilibrium configuration such as the sudden snapping of a prestressed structural cable, and evaluates the
redundancy available within the structure. This analysis always involves a two-stage procedure. The first stage
involves a static solution by a linear static method or a nonlinear static method (either Newton’s tracing the
equilibrium path SOL 106, an implicit dynamic relaxation by SOL 129 or an explicit dynamic relaxation method
LS-DYNA) in order to obtain the deflected configuration and the stiffness of the structure in the deflected
configuration KT by the prestress (prestressing of structural members such as cables contribute greatly to a large
change in stiffness within the static solution and hence will require a nonlinear static method) and gravity. The
second stage involves a restart into a nonlinear transient dynamic solution scheme with no additional dynamic
excitation but with a change in the structure (in the deletion of a member that fails in brittle fashion simulating a
redundancy check) or a change in boundary condition (to simulate the effect of the loss of a support or anchor
attached to a prestressed cable etc.). An example would be the gradual prestressing of structural cable elements
within a suspension bridge or a cable prestressed tower until a static solution (by SOL 106, implicit SOL 129 or
explicit LS-DYNA) is achieved. The cables can be prestressed using a gradual temperature load case (or a gradual
enforced displacement on the cable anchorage points) plus gravitational loads until the correct level of prestress is
achieved (by SOL 106, implicit SOL 129 or explicit LS-DYNA). Then with a restart into an explicit transient
dynamic scheme of LS-DYNA, the boundary condition supporting the cable is released or a cable element is
deleted, causing the structure to experience an out-of-balance of forces and hence vibrate to a new static
equilibrium configuration.
The Heathrow T5 Visual Control Tower was analyzed to a sudden brittle cable failure. An initial dynamic
relaxation phase was performed (in LS-DYNA) in order to attain the static equilibrium position under gravity load
with the correct pretension in the cables. The prestress in the cables was applied by a prescribed displacement at the
cable anchorages in the direction along the cable axis during the dynamic relaxation phase until the force in cables
reached a value of approximately 1.59MN. At this stage it is a good idea to confirm the natural frequency of the
model by applying an impulsive force of say 0.3 seconds (knowing the fundamental mode to be approximately
0.95Hz) duration at the top of the tower. The frequency of the displacement response is observed to be
approximately 0.95 Hz.
486
Second Edition
Static Phase
Application
of Impulse
This correlates well with the natural modes analysis performed in previous linear NASTRAN analyses.
487
Second Edition
For reference, the natural frequencies of all modes up to 50Hz are presented as follows. The modal masses
(normalized to MAX unity) are also presented for this elegant 680.9 tonne structure.
T5 VCR REAL MODAL ANALYSIS - FREQUENCY
4.000
Cable Modes
3.500
Secondary Tower
3.000
Bending Modes
Frequency (Hz)
2.500
Primary Tower
2.000 Cable Modes Cable Modes Torsion Mode
1.500
Cable Modes
1.000 Primary Tower
Bending Modes
0.500
0.000
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50
Mode Number
T5 VCR REAL MODAL ANALYSIS - MODAL MASS
250.000
225.000 S econdary Tower
Bending Modes
200.000
Modal Mass (Tonnes)
175.000
150.000
Primary Tower Primary Tower
125.000 Bending Modes Torsion Mode
100.000
75.000
50.000 Cable Modes

Cable Modes Cable Modes Cable Modes
25.000
0.000
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50
Mode Number
The static solution was followed by a transient dynamic phase where the displacement constraint in one of the
cables was released, effectively modelling the consequence of a cable suddenly snapping. The resulting effect on
the structure is of an impulse of certain duration. On animation of the displacement response (with or without a
vector animation of the velocity response), it can be observed if higher modes were excited or not as this will affect
the distribution of stresses within the system. Exciting the second tower mode (as actually occurred in this
particular case) will certainly cause certain effects on the shaft which will not be captured from any static based
analysis.
488
Second Edition
The axial force time history in an inner cable when the outer cable snaps is shown.
Static Phase
Convergence to New
Static Equilibrium
Position
Outer Cable Snaps
489
Second Edition
The time enveloped axial force within the 1D elements of the system is presented for design purposes. Of course,
for completion, the time enveloped shear in 2 directions, bending about 2 axes and torsion would also have to be
presented.
490
Second Edition
4.9.5 GNL, MNL Explicit Central FD Scheme for Newton’s Dynamic Equilibrium ODE (LS-DYNA)
4.9.5.1 Solution of Partial or Ordinary Differential Equations Using Finite Difference (FD) Schemes
Finite difference mathematical methods are used to solve partial and ordinary differential equations (PDEs and
ODEs) which are too complicated for exact analytical methods. Finite difference methods are thus numerical
methods that are subjected to stability and accuracy requirements when solving the differential equations.
The only mathematics required is the elegant Taylor’s theorem which states that for a function φ(t),
∂φ( t ) (∆t )2 ∂ 2 φ( t )
φ ( t + ∆t ) = φ( t ) + ∆t + + ...
∂t 2 ∂t 2
The expression will be exact if an infinite number of terms are taken and if ∆t is small. We can also readily state
that
∂φ( t ) (∆t )2 ∂ 2 φ( t )
φ ( t − ∆t ) = φ( t ) − ∆ t + − ...
∂t 2 ∂t 2
Finite difference schemes utilize the above two expressions to reduce the PDEs or the ODEs to a set of coupled or
uncoupled equations with the same number of unknowns as the number of equations so that they can be solved. A
set of coupled equations will require simultaneous solution algorithms (or inversing the matrix, which of course is
not performed as is computationally too intensive). A finite difference scheme, which reduces the PDEs or ODEs to
a set of coupled equations, is termed an implicit scheme. In an implicit scheme, the value for a variable at a
particular grid at t+∆t is related to variables at adjacent grid points for the same time level. Conversely, a set of
uncoupled equations do not required any simultaneous solution algorithms. A finite difference scheme, which
reduces the PDEs or ODEs to a set of uncoupled equations, is termed an explicit scheme. An explicit scheme solves
for unknowns at time t+∆t expressed directly in terms of known values at time t (or before) and already known
values at t+∆t.
The central (finite) difference scheme subtracts and adds the two Taylor equations above to give the two
expressions below for the first and second differential, both of which have an error in the order (∆t)2.
∂φ( t ) φ( t + ∆t ) − φ( t − ∆t )
= + O(∆t )
2
∂t 2 ∆t
∂ 2 φ( t ) φ( t + ∆ t ) − 2φ ( t ) + φ( t − ∆ t )
= + O (∆t )
2
∂t 2
( ∆t ) 2
The forward (finite) difference scheme rearranges the first Taylor expression to give
∂φ( t ) φ( t + ∆t ) − φ( t )
= + O (∆t )
∂t ∆t
The backward (finite) difference scheme rearranges the second Taylor expression to give
∂φ( t ) φ( t ) − φ( t + ∆t )
= + O (∆t )
∂t ∆t
These schemes in themselves are not implicit or explicit. The application of these schemes to PDEs or ODEs
will result in sets of equations that are implicit or explicit. The differential equation that concerns us is Newton’s
Dynamic Equilibrium Ordinary Differential Equation.
491
Second Edition
4.9.5.2 Mathematical Formulation of Analysis – Explicit Central Finite Difference Scheme
Newton’s Dynamic Equilibrium Ordinary Differential Equation at time t can be written as

[M]{&
u&( t )} + [C( t )]{u&( t )} + [K ( t )]{u ( t )} − {P( t )} = {0}
or as follows
Applying the central finite difference scheme
∂u ( t ) u ( t + ∆t ) − u ( t − ∆t )
= + O(∆t )
2
∂t 2 ∆t
∂ 2 u(t) u ( t + ∆t ) − 2 u ( t ) + u ( t − ∆t )
= + O (∆t )
2
∂t 2
( ∆t ) 2
or in other notations
we arrive to the finite difference expression

 
[M ] u (t + ∆t ) − 2u (t2) + u ( t − ∆t )  + [C(t )] u (t + ∆t ) − u (t − ∆t )  + [K ( t )]{u (t )} − {P( t )} + O(∆t )2 = {0}
 ( ∆t )   2 ∆t 
The only unknown at time t+∆t in this expression is the displacement vector.
We need to know initial values {u (t = 0)} and {u (t = −∆t)} to begin computation. However, we usually only know
the initial displacement {u (t = 0)} and velocity {du/dt (t = 0)}. One method is to define a fictitious quantity {u (t =
−∆t)} with the following procedure.
Eliminating {u (t = ∆t)}, hence solving for {u (t = −∆t)},
in which from equilibrium conditions we can deduce
Therefore, knowing the initial displacement {u (t = 0)} and velocity {du/dt (t = 0)}, we can obtain the fictitious
quantity {u (t = −∆t)}. Now with {u (t = 0)} and {u (t = −∆t)} we can begin computation.
Note however, the expression for {u(t)} can only be written explicitly after inverting the [M] matrix. In order to
avoid a complicated [M] matrix inversion (effectively solving the then coupled simultaneous equations), the mass
matrix must be diagonal. This is thus a requirement in LS-DYNA for all elements to have lumped mass
formulations instead of coupled (or consistent) mass matrix formulations. This effectively maintains the explicit
solution scheme. Had the mass matrix been coupled, simultaneous equations need to be solved making the solution
scheme implicit. Also note that the time step may vary from time to time. Thus, in the above finite difference
approximation, for completion, it must be stressed that the term 2∆t as the denominator in the velocity finite
difference expression is the total time step over two steps, or the average multiplied by two.
It is crucial to remember that not all the terms within the Taylor’s Expansion were utilized. In this case, the first 3
terms was utilized for the variation of displacement. This means that the displacement is parabolic, velocity is
492
Second Edition
linear and the acceleration is constant over the time step. Hence that the displacement error in the finite
difference approximation of the ODE is of the order of the square of the time step, O(∆t)2.
The central finite difference solution scheme adopted in LS-DYNA is

IV. Conditionally stable as long as ∆t < Tmin/π
V. Second order accurate since O(∆t)2
4.9.5.3 Stability
The stability of any finite difference scheme can be investigated by the von Neumann Fourier method of stability
analysis. Using this method, it can be shown for this case that for stability of Newton’s undamped dynamic
equilibrium ODE
2
∆t <
ω MAX
For Newton’s damped dynamic equilibrium ODE, the stability condition is
2 
∆t <  1 + ζ 2 − ζ 
ω MAX  
Damping thus further reduces the critical time step.
The time step is limited by the largest natural frequency of the structure which in turn is limited by the highest
natural frequency of any individual element in the finite element mesh. The solution technique is conditionally
stable, which means that the timestep must be kept small enough for the solution to have a physical meaning.
Physically, the timestep size has to be less than the time taken for a sound wave to traverse the smallest deformable
(i.e. non-rigid) element in the model so that a stress wave which travels through the element will cause a stress to
develop within the element and not jump across it. This is because the speed of the sound wave c through the
element is some function of its natural frequency. Hence, the timestep, ∆t has to be calculated for each and every
element and the smallest governs the timestep for the whole analysis. Since we do not want the stress wave (at the
speed of sound) to jump the element, the element must be less stiff, longer and/or of greater mass, thus of lower
natural frequency. Since T=2π/ω, the conditionally stable explicit solution algorithm requires that the time step
subdivide the lowest period by π for stability (for the undamped case).
∆t < 2 / ωmax
∆t < Tmin / π
Hence to have a large time step: -
(i) avoid as far as possible short, light and stiff elements

(i) make the relatively stiffer elements rigid
(ii) employ mass scaling but ensure that the total mass added is not too much as to decrease the
accuracy significantly; mass is added to elements so that their timestep is increased to the
minimum set value; this automatic computation does not apply to spring elements, if which is the
governing element, the user should manually add lumped masses to their nodes
(iii) ensure limited hourglassing as distorted elements will decrease time step
(iv) employ subcycling if there are relatively few small elements controlling the time step and the bulk
of the elements have a stable time step at least twice that of the smallest element; subcycling
divides elements into groups of timestep of ∆t, 2∆t, 4∆t, 8∆t, 16∆t, 32∆t and so on.
For the Hughes-Liu (constant moment) beam and truss element, the critical time step is
∆t = L/c
where c = speed of sound wave (E/ρ)0.5. This is as follows. We have said that
∆t < 2 / ωmax
Now, for a truss
493
Second Edition
ωmax = 2c/L
Hence,
∆t < 2 / ωmax = L/c
For the Belytschko beam (linear moment), the critical time step is given
∆t = L/c
if the highest frequency is axial, but if the bending frequency is higher, then it is given by
0.5L
∆t =
 3 1 
c 3I  +
12I + AL
2
AL2 
where I is the maximum moment of inertia and A the area.
For shell elements, the critical time step is

∆t = L/c
where L is the characteristic length and c is given by
E
c=
(
ρ1− ν2 )
For solid elements, the critical time step is
L
∆t =


{ }
Q + Q 2 + c 2 1 / 2  
 
where Q is a function of some bulk viscosity coefficients. For elastic materials with constant bulk modulus, the
speed of sound c is given by
E(1 − ν )
c=
ρ(1 + ν )(1 − 2ν )
The critical time step for a scalar spring is
2M 1 M 2
∆t = 2
k (M 1 + M 2 )
From the critical time step equations, we can conclude that

Ι. Since ∆t α ρ1/2, mass scaling is only marginally effective in increasing time step.
ΙΙ. Since ∆t α L, increase the dimension of the element is very effective in increasing time step.
III. Comparison of the critical time step for the truss element and the solid element shows that, for non-
zero Poisson’s ratio, the solid element gives considerably smaller time steps. The critical time step
for shell elements is much more comparable to that of the truss element for non-zero Poisson’s
ratio.
4.9.5.4 Accuracy
It is crucial to remember that not all the terms within the Taylor’s Expansion were utilized. In this case, the first 3
terms was utilized for the variation of displacement. This means that the displacement is parabolic, velocity is
linear and the acceleration is constant over the time step. Hence that the displacement error in the finite
difference approximation of the ODE is of the order of the square of the time step, O(∆t)2.
The time step size requirement to satisfy stability is usually sufficient to satisfy accuracy requirements. It is often
mentioned that for good accuracy, the time step must subdivide the lowest period of interest by 10, a condition
which is usually satisfied if the lowest period is subdivided by π. The order of error generated as detailed above
must however be remembered.
494
Second Edition
4.9.6 GNL, MNL Implicit Newmark Scheme for Newton’s Dynamic Equilibrium ODE (MSC.NASTRAN)
4.9.6.1 Mathematical Formulation of Analysis – Implicit Newmark Scheme
The Newmark method was proposed by Nathan Newmark and it is a general method that encompasses a family of
different integration schemes including the linear acceleration and constant-average-acceleration methods. This
method can be derived by considering the Taylor series expansions of the displacement and velocity at time ti+1
about ti with some remainder terms.
where 0<θ1,2<1. We can now approximate the displacement and velocity using truncated Taylor series.
where the terms containing β and γ represent the remainder terms in the Taylor series expansions. Since the exact
values of the remainder terms are not known, β and γ are parameters to be chosen by the user to arrive at a
numerical approximation. With some rearrangements of the above two equations, the Newark method comprises
the following three equations
With some manipulation the following equivalent static equation is obtained.
where
The Newmark-β method assumes some degree of contribution of acceleration from times t and t+∆t. When γ
is anything other than 0.5, superfluous damping is introduced into the system. Hence it is usually taken as
0.5. β can vary from 1/6 to ½ although if γ=0.5, β has got to be greater than ¼ for unconditional stability. The
general Newmark-β scheme encapsulates the following schemes.
β = 0, γ = ½ the explicit central difference scheme, but the above procedure inapplicable
β = 1/2, γ = ½ the implicit linear acceleration scheme
β = 1/4, γ = ½ the implicit constant-average-acceleration (a.k.a. trapezoidal) scheme
β = 1/6, γ = ½ the implicit linear acceleration
β = 1/12, γ = ½ the implicit Fox-Goodwin method which is 4th order accurate
The Newmark-β scheme is unconditionally stable as long as γ ≥ 0.5 and β ≥ 0.25 (γ + 0.5)2. In general the
Newmark-β is second order accurate.
495
Second Edition
The Wilson-θ method is an extension of the linear acceleration method, but the acceleration is assumed to be linear
from time t to t+θdt. The scheme is unconditionally stable if θ ≥ 1.37. Usually θ = 1.40 is employed. When θ = 1,
the scheme is equivalent to the linear acceleration method.
The critical step size depends on the damping as well as the natural frequency of the structure. The values shown in
the table assume that damping is zero. In general, the increase of damping increases the critical step sizes, although
this effect is nullified as long as γ = 0.5.
The Newmark-β (β=1/3 default) (3-point integration scheme) implicit solution scheme adopted in
MSC.NASTRAN SOL 109 is
IV. Unconditionally stable
V. Second order accurate since O(∆t)2
MSC.NASTRAN SOL 129 (AUTO or TSTEP) is
I. Unconditionally stable
II. Second order accurate since O(∆t)2
MSC.NASTRAN SOL 129 (ADAPT) is
I. Unconditionally stable
II. Second order accurate since O(∆t)2
The recommended default SOL 129 ADAPT scheme solves
using the implicit constant-average-acceleration (a.k.a. trapezoidal) scheme such that
where
496
Second Edition
where η denotes numerical damping (PARAM, NDAMP). The ADAPT (default) is used to modify the integration
time step automatically (within bounds) during the analysis to respond to changes in the frequency content of the
loading on TLOADi and the response natural frequency.
4.9.6.2 Stability
The implicit Newmark-β scheme is unconditionally stable as long as γ ≥ 0.5 and β ≥ 0.25 (γ + 0.5)2. Hence, the
time step can be as large as possible. However, the accuracy requirements will govern the size of the time step. The
critical time step for Newmark-β schemes is
From the above expression, we can see that when γ = 1/2, damping does not influence the critical step size.
However, when γ > 1/2, the increase of damping tends to increase the critical step size.
4.9.6.3 Accuracy
It is often mentioned that for good accuracy, the time step must subdivide the lowest period of interest by 10. For
the purposes of illustration, lets consider the fundamental bending frequency (although in theory we should
consider the higher frequencies of interest from all modes whether bending, axial or torsional) of a simply
supported beam. Discretizing the beam as a lumped dynamic mass in the middle and assuming that the fundamental
mode shape resembles the static deflected shape (because the p0i/Ki term is largest for the fundamental mode), and
with the knowledge that the static deflection due to a unit point load on a simply supported beam is ∆1 = L3/(48EI),
the unconditionally stable implicit solution algorithm requires that the time step subdivide (by at least 10 for good
accuracy) the period of interest for accuracy
∆t < 2π / 10ω1
< π/5 (m/k)1/2
< π/5 (ρAL∆1)1/2
< π/5 (ρALL3/(48EI))1/2
< π/5 L2 (ρA/(48EI))1/2
A small time step is necessary for accuracy. The following should be considered for accuracy: -
(a) The time step should be smaller than 1/10 of the lowest natural period of interest of the system
(b) The time step should be small enough to properly represent the variation of loading and capture all
the significant peaks and troughs
497
Second Edition
4.9.7 Comparison Between Implicit and Explicit Time Integration Schemes
The choice between employing an implicit or explicit time integration solution technique depends on the points
listed below. These conditions are essential and must be considered for the physical problem being solved.
Implicit Time Integration Explicit Time Integration

Requires inversion of stiffness matrix, which for
nonlinear structures changes from time to time. Hence,
Does not require inversion of stiffness matrix, and
the use of implicit methods for nonlinear structures
stiffness matrix automatically updated at each time step.
requires a Newton-type iterative approach, which is
not needed in explicit methods.
The cost per timestep is large The cost per time step is small
Element formulation should be complex as the matrix Element formulation should be simple as element
inversion dominates the cost processing dominates the cost
Coarser mesh as element formulation complex Finer mesh as element formulation simple
Appropriate for smaller models as the computational

Appropriate for larger models as the computational
cost of an implicit analysis varies proportionally to the
cost of an explicit analysis varies proportionally to the
7th power of a 3D model size. Hence the cost increase
4th power of a 3D model size. Hence the cost increase
for doubling the mesh density of solid elements is x
for doubling the mesh density of solid elements is x 16.
128.
Extremely appropriate if the model is materially

linear, geometrically linear and has no contact
definitions, failing which the large time step no longer
enables the perfectly accurate representation of the Extremely appropriate if the model is materially highly
tangent stiffness matrix over a large range of strain nonlinear, geometrically highly nonlinear and has
increment. Nonlinear models can still be analyzed with contact definitions
implicit schemes but the small time step requirement
for accuracy (not stability) means that it is more
computationally beneficial to use an explicit scheme.
The solution is unconditionally stable, hence a large

The solution is conditionally stable, hence a small time
time step can be employed, the size of which is
step must be employed. The time step needs to
limited only by accuracy of the solution; The time
subdivide the smallest period (highest frequency) for
step for an implicit analysis is usually 100 – 1000
stability in the model. This automatically takes care of
times greater than that of an explicit analysis. The time
accuracy requirements, which also requires the
step needs to subdivide the smallest period (highest
subdivision of the smallest period.
frequency) of interest for accuracy in the model.
Appropriate if the physics of the problem do not Appropriate if the physics of the problem require a
require a small time step, such as in stress wave small time step, such as in stress wave transmission
transmission problems problems
The only way to check whether the time step for accuracy in an implicit analysis is adequate is to repeat the last
part of the analysis with a reduced time step and check that the results are not significantly affected. The time step
in both implicit and explicit analyses is limited by the highest frequency in the structure or the lowest period. But
498
Second Edition
the difference with implicit analysis is that since it is an unconditionally stable solution scheme, the time step is
limited by the highest frequency of interest, in most instances that of only the first few initial modes of vibration.
On the other hand, an explicit scheme requires that the time step subdivide the lowest period in the model as it is a
conditionally stable algorithm. Thus, we are trying to minimize the largest frequency in the structure. Hence, short,
stiff and light components are not computationally efficient for time integration analysis.
We have seen that the choice of employing an implicit or explicit scheme depends on a lot of parameters. The
fundamental difference is the size of the time step, which directly affects the computational speed. The time step in
an implicit scheme is governed by accuracy conditions (∆t must subdivide smallest period of interest by 10) and not
by stability conditions of which there are none. The time step in an explicit scheme is governed by stability
conditions (∆t must subdivide smallest period by π) and not by the accuracy conditions (∆t must subdivide smallest
period of interest by 10), which are usually automatically satisfied.
As mentioned, another clear indication of whether to employ an implicit or explicit scheme is the physics of the
problem. If the system is highly nonlinear (geometrically, materially and due to contact definitions), then the
requirement of a small time step for accuracy (as the stiffness, damping and external force within a time step is
assumed constant) usually nullifies the benefit of the unconditionally stable large time step requirement for stability
of an implicit scheme. Likewise in stress propagation problems. In these circumstances, it is prudent to employ an
explicit time integration scheme, which has a small time step requirement for stability anyhow. The time taken to
move one time step is much smaller in an explicit scheme than an implicit scheme due to the requirement of matrix
inversion or simultaneous equation solving algorithms in the latter.
499
Second Edition
4.9.8.1 GNL, MNL Direct Forced (Implicit) Transient Response Analysis
All cards applicable to SOL 109 are also applicable to SOL 129.
SOL 129
SDISPLACEMENT(<SORT1/SORT2>,<PRINT,PUNCH>) = ALL/<Grid Set ID>
SVELOCITY(<SORT1/SORT2>,<PRINT,PUNCH>) = ALL/<Grid Set ID>
SACCELERATION(<SORT1/SORT2>,<PRINT,PUNCH>) = ALL/<Grid Set ID>
NLLOAD(PLOT)
SUBCASE 1
NONLINEAR = < ID OF NOLINi >
TSTEPNL = < ID OF TSTEPNL >
SUBCASE 2
NONLINEAR = < ID OF NOLINi >
TSTEPNL = < ID OF TSTEPNL >
$ XY plot output
OUTPUT(XYPLOT)
$ BULK DATA
PARAM, AUTOSPC, NO $ AUTOSPC NO By Default

PARAM, FOLLOWK, YES $ Includes Follower Force Stiffness
PARAM, LGDISP, 1 $ Includes Large Displacement Effects i.e. [T] not constant
PARAM, LANGLE, 2 $ Rotation Vector Approach for Large Rotations
PARAM, K6ROT, 100 $ Shell normal rotation restrained in nonlinear analysis
Mass-less DOFs should be avoided in SOL 129. The time step should be based on capturing the maximum
frequency of interest. In linear analysis (SOL 109 and SOL 112) it is recommended that the time step, DT be a
tenth of the period representing the highest frequency of interest (i.e. if 100Hz, then DT should be 0.001s) and that
500
Second Edition
DT should be small enough to accurately capture the highest frequency content of the excitation (i.e. if 1000Hz,
then DT should be 0.001s or less). In nonlinear analysis SOL 129, if NOLINi is incorporated, DT should be 1/5 to
1/10 the size described above since NOLINi puts the structure out of equilibrium by one time step, so a very small
integration time step is required to minimize this limitation. The TSTEPNL bulk data entry is as follows.
Unlike linear analyses schemes, nonlinear analysis schemes (SOL 106 and SOL 129) employ subcases on an
incremental basis, instead of separate load cases and boundary conditions. For SOL 129, the bulk data loads and
prescribed motions are measured from the initial configuration at time zero. The following can be performed with
multiple subcases:
(i) Loads can be changed

(ii) SPC cannot be changed. However, the change in boundary condition can more often than not be
defined with prescribed motion load curves
(iii) The initial time step size DT can be changed
The duration of the analysis is the number of time steps NDT times the time step size DT, which in general varies.
NO is the time step interval for output.
In this NONLINEAR TIME DOMAIN solution, the static response must be added to the dynamic response if the
Alternatively, in this NONLINEAR TIME DOMAIN solution, if the dynamic analysis is performed with the
4.9.8.1.1 Time Step and Stiffness Update Strategy (ADAPT with ADJUST, MSTEP, RB and MAXR,
AUTO, TSTEP with KSTEP)
The load is divided up into time steps. Each time step is then divided into iteration steps. METHOD specifies the
method for controlling time step and stiffness updates, whether ADAPT (default), AUTO or TSTEP.
The ADAPT (default) is used to modify the integration time step automatically (within bounds) during the analysis
to respond to changes in the frequency content of the loading on TLOADi and the response natural frequency.
However, it may force the solution to solve for unnecessary high frequency modes. DT is used as an initial time
step estimate. ADJUST controls the automatic time stepping, by default 5. If ADJUST = 0, then the automatic
adjustment is deactivated. If ADJUST > 0, the time increment is continually adjusted for the first few steps until a
501
Second Edition
good value of DT is obtained. After this initial adjustment, the time increment is adjusted every ADJUST-th time
step only. MSTEP and RB are used to adjust the time increment during analysis. MSTEP is the number of steps to
obtain the dominant period response and RB defines bounds for maintaining the same time step for the stepping
function during the adaptive process, default 0.75. The recommended value of MSTEP for nearly linear problems is
20. A larger value (e.g., 40) is required for highly nonlinear problems. By default, the program automatically
computes the value of MSTEP based on the changes in the stiffness. The time increment adjustment is based on the
number of time steps desired to capture the dominant frequency response accurately. The time increment is
adjusted as follows.
where
MAXR is the maximum ratio for the adjusted incremental time relative to DT allowed for time step adjustment, by
default 16. MAXR is used to define the upper and lower bounds for adjusted time step size as follows.
ADAPT is the average acceleration scheme with β = 0.25 and can be made to behave similarly to AUTO and
TSTEP using MAXR set to 1.0 to prevent time step changes and possibly also set KSTEP to 1.
AUTO is analogous to AUTO in SOL 106. Time step is constant with AUTO.
TSTEP with KSTEP is analogous to ITER with KSTEP in SOL 106. Time step is constant with TSTEP.
The METHOD field selects an option for direct time integration and the stiffness matrix update strategies among
ADAPT, AUTO and TSTEP. If the AUTO option is selected, MSC.Nastran automatically updates the stiffness
matrix to improve convergence while the KSTEP value is ignored. If the TSTEP option is selected, MSC.Nastran
updates the stiffness matrix every KSTEP-th increment of time. If the ADAPT option is selected, MSC.Nastran
automatically adjusts the incremental time and uses the bisection algorithm in case of divergence. During the
bisection process in the ADAPT option, stiffness is updated at every KSTEP-th successful bisection. The ADAPT
method allows linear transient analysis, but AUTO or TSTEP will abort the run if the model does not have any data
representing nonlinearity. The stiffness matrix is always updated for a new subcase or restart, irrespective of the
option selected.
4.9.8.1.2 Convergence Acceleration Techniques (Quasi-Newton MAXQN, Line Search using MAXLS,
Bisection using MAXITER, RTOLB, MAXBIS and MAXDIV)
Quasi-Newton updates and line search is as SOL 106. In SOL 129, the default for MAXQN is 10 and MAXLS is 2.
MAXITER specifies the limit on number of iterations for each time step, 10 by default. The sign of MAXITER
provides a control over the ultimate recourse (reiteration) in case of failure in convergence or bisection. If the
MAXITER is negative, the analysis is terminated when the divergence condition is encountered twice during the
same time step or the solution diverges for five consecutive time steps. If MAXITER is positive, the program
computes the best attainable solution and continues the analysis on second divergence. If the solution does not
converge at MAXITER iterations, the time step is bisected and the analysis is repeated. Bisection is also activated
if RTOLB, by default 20.0 is exceeded. RTOLB is the maximum value of incremental rotation (in degrees)
502
Second Edition
allowed per iteration before bisection is activated. MAXBIS specifies the maximum number of bisections for each
time step, 5 by default. If MAXBIS is positive and the solution does not converge after MAXBIS bisections, the
best solution is computed and the analysis is continued to the next time step. If MAXBIS is negative and the
solution does not converge in |MAXBIS| bisection, the analysis is terminated. MAXDIV provides control over
diverging solutions, default 2. Depending on the rate of divergence, the number of diverging solutions (NDIV) is
incremented by 1 or 2. The solution is assumed to diverge when NDIV reaches MAXDIV during the iteration. If
the bisection option is used (allowed MAXBIS times) the time step is bisected upon divergence. Otherwise, the
solution for the time step is repeated with a new stiffness based on the converged state at the beginning of the time
step. If NDIV reaches MAXDIV again within the same time step, the analysis is terminated.
The number of iterations for a time step is limited to MAXITER. If the solution does not converge in MAXITER
iterations, the process is treated as a divergent process; i.e., either a bisection or stiffness matrix update takes place
based on the value of MAXBIS. The sign of MAXITER provides a control over reiteration in case of failure in
convergence or bisection. If MAXITER is negative, the analysis is terminated when the divergence condition is
encountered twice during the same time step or the solution diverges for five consecutive time steps. If MAXITER
is positive, MSC.Nastran computes the best attainable solution and continues the analysis. The MAXDIV field
provides control over diverging solutions. Depending on the rate of divergence, the number of diverging solutions
(NDIV) is incremented by 1 or 2. The solution is assumed to be divergent when NDIV reaches MAXDIV during
the iteration. If the bisection option is used with the ADAPT method, the time step is bisected upon divergence.
Otherwise, the solution for the time step is repeated with a new stiffness based on the converged state at the
beginning of the time step. If NDIV reaches MAXDIV twice within the same time step, the analysis is terminated
with a fatal message.
4.9.8.1.3 Convergence Criteria (CONV, EPSU, EPSP, EPSW)
CONV specifies the flags to select convergence criteria, UPW or any combination, note default PW. EPSU is the
error tolerance for displacement error (U) convergence criteria, 1.0E-2 by default. EPSP is the error tolerance for
load equilibrium error (P) convergence criteria, 1.0E-3 by default. EPSW is the error tolerance for work error (W)
convergence criteria, 1.0E-6 by default. These correspond to the very high tolerance, PARAM, NLTOL, 0 unlike
SOL 106 which had engineering tolerance levels PARAM, NLTOL, 2.
Nonlinear transient loads, which are functions of the displacement and/or velocity of the response, can be specified
using NOLINi entries.
4.9.8.1.5 Nonlinear Finite Elements, Nonlinear Material Definitions and Nonlinear Contact Interface
The nonlinear finite elements, the nonlinear material definitions and the nonlinear contact interface are as defined
in the nonlinear static analysis SOL 106 section.
503
Second Edition
4.9.8.2 Nonlinear Static Analysis and Nonlinear Transient Analysis
Subcases can be employed to change the method of analysis from SOL 106 to SOL 129.
4.9.8.3 Restart From Nonlinear Static Analysis SOL 106 Into Nonlinear Transient Analysis SOL 129
Restarts are allowed from end of subcases. A LOOPID is created after each converged load increment in static
analysis and at the end of each converged subcase in nonlinear transient analysis. Only LOOPIDs written to the
database and identified as such in the printed output can be used for a restart.
$ BULK DATA
PARAM, SLOOPID, L $ Load Step ID, L at the End of a Subcase of the SOL 106 Run
The initial transient loads should be identical to the static loads at the restart state. This is to ensure no sudden jump
in load. The changes allowed in model are
(i) Boundary conditions, i.e. SPC
(ii) Direct input matrices
(iii) Mass
(iv) Damping
Note that when restarting a transient analysis from a static analysis, the static loads which have been applied must
be maintained throughout the transient phase.
4.9.8.4 Restart From Nonlinear Transient Analysis SOL 129 Into Nonlinear Transient Analysis SOL 129
Restarts are allowed from end of subcases.
$ FMS
RESTART
$ BULK DATA
PARAM, LOOPID, L $ Loop Number on Printout, L
PARAM, STIME, T $ Starting Value of Time, T
Note that when restarting a transient analysis from a static analysis (whether a Newton-Raphson nonlinear static
analysis or dynamic relaxation), the static loads which have been applied must be maintained throughout the
transient phase. Hence, when a transient phase dynamic analysis follows a dynamic relaxation analysis, it is
prudent to define two curves for the static loads or prescribed motions, one ramped from zero to the static value in
the dynamic relaxation phase and the other maintained at the same static throughout the transient dynamic analysis
phase.
504
Second Edition
4.9.8.5 Implicit Nonlinear (Static and) Dynamic Analysis SOL 400
SOL 400 replaces SOL 106 and SOL 129 adding MSC.Marc’s 3D contact routines, large rotation of rigid bodies
and additional types of rigid mechanisms directly inside MSC.Nastran.
4.9.8.6 Implicit Nonlinear (Static and) Dynamic Analysis SOL 600
SOL 600 is the MSC.Marc implicit nonlinear static and dynamic analysis solver within MSC.NASTRAN.
4.9.8.7 Explicit Nonlinear Dynamic Analysis SOL 700
SOL 700 is the LS-DYNA explicit nonlinear dynamic analysis solver within MSC.NASTRAN.
505
Second Edition
4.9.9 LS-DYNA Decks
4.9.9.1 GNL, MNL Direct Forced (Explicit) Transient Response Analysis
To specify termination time of the explicit dynamic analysis

*CONTROL_TERMINATION
Termination
Termination
Termination Change in
Termination Termination Min Time
Energy Ratio Total Mass
Time Limit Cycle Limit Step Size
Limit From Mass
Limit
Scaling
To set structural timestep size control and invoke mass scaling

*CONTROL_TIMESTEP
Min Time
Maximum
Initial Time Factor For Shell Min Step For Erosion Limit Mass
Basis Time Step
Step Time Step Time Step Mass Flag Scaling
Curve
Scaling
To enable subcycling
*CONTROL_SUBCYCLE
To specify user-defined boundary conditions for the transient phase,
*LOAD_NODE_<POINT, SET> (HM: forces, moments)

*SET_NODE
*DEFINE_CURVE with SIDR = 0 for transient phase
*LOAD_BEAM_<ELEMENT, SET>
*SET_BEAM
*LOAD_SHELL_<ELEMENT, SET> (HM: pressure ShellPres)

*SET_SHELL
*LOAD_RIGID_BODY
*LOAD_SEGMENT_<SET> (HM: pressure SegmentPre)

*SET_SEGMENT
To apply automatically computed gravitational loads, noting that by d-Alembert’s principle, applying accelerations
in a certain direction results in inertial loads acting in the opposite direction. Hence, a downward gravity is applied
as an upward acceleration.
*LOAD_BODY_Z with sf = 9.81 ms-2

Do not apply gravity loads on soil elements because the in-situ measured soil properties already take into account
its stiffness with gravity applied.
506
Second Edition
To prescribe displacements, velocity or accelerations (as in seismic analysis) on a node, on a set of nodes, on a
rigid body in the global axes system or on a rigid body in the rigid body local axes system,
*BOUNDARY_PRESCRIBED_MOTION_<NODE, SET, RIGID, RIGID_LOCAL> (HM: velocities prcrbVel

or HM: accels)
Velocity,
Load Curve
NID, NSID, Acceleration or
DOF LCID Scale Factor VID DEATH BIRTH
or PART ID Displacement
SF
VAD
The vector ID, VID is used to specify a direction vector if imposed motion not in global axes system. DEATH and
BIRTH can be used to specify deactivation and activation times of the imposed motion during the analysis.
*SET_NODE_LIST
*DEFINE_CURVE
LCID SIDR SFA SFO OFFA OFFO DATTYP
… …
SIDR defines whether the curve is valid for the transient phase, stress initialization phase or both. Here obviously,
SIDR = 0. Having said that, for every transient pair of *BOUNDARY_PRESCRIBED_MOTION and
*DEFINE_CURVE cards defined, it is generally necessary to define two corresponding cards that is valid for the
stress initialization (dynamic relaxation) phase if dynamic relaxation is activated. For instance, if the earthquake
acceleration time histories are to be applied in the transient phase, it is necessary to define zero velocity prescribed
boundary conditions for the dynamic relaxation phase so that the structure is supported. The
BOUNDARY_PRESCRIBED_MOTION card is useful to change boundary conditions during an analysis.
*DEFINE_VECTOR if DOF not global i.e. VID defined

VID XTail YTail ZTail Xhead Yhead ZHead
To prescribe initial conditions

*INITIAL_VELOCITY_<BLANK, NODE, GENERATION> (HM: velocities initVel)
*SET_NODE
or,
*PART_INERTIA
or,
*CONSTRAINED_NODAL_RIGID_BODY_INERTIA
507
Second Edition
4.9.10.1 Determination of Displacement Response Time History by Solving the SDOF Nonlinear (in
Stiffness, Damping and Displacement) Equation of Motion ODE for Deterministic Time Domain
Loading With/Without Initial Conditions by Implicit Newmark-β Time Integration Schemes
Nonlinear time domain hand methods are capable of analyzing: -
SDOF or Single-Modal Response to Deterministic Non-Periodic Short Duration Impulse and Hence
Random Non-Stationary Short Duration Impulse by Enveloping Deterministic Responses
Multi-modal nonlinear response cannot be performed because the superposition of nonlinear modal responses is not
strictly valid for nonlinear systems where the physical coordinates (which includes all modes together) responds
nonlinearly. Nonlinear analysis can be performed by the implicit Newmark-β method (constant acceleration, linear
acceleration etc.) or the implicit Wilson-θ method. Since hand computations are limited to SDOF system, all the
algorithms are explicit as there is no need for matrix inversion (or solving of simultaneous equations).
The loading is divided into a sequence of time intervals. The response is evaluated at successive increments ∆t of
time, usually taken of equal lengths of time for computational convenience. At the beginning of each interval, the
condition of dynamic equilibrium is established. Then, the response for the time increment ∆t is evaluated
approximately on the basis that the coefficients k and c remain constant during the interval ∆t. The non-linear
characteristics of these coefficients are considered in the analysis be re-evaluating these coefficients at the
beginning of each time increment. The response is then obtained using the displacement and velocity calculated at
the end of the time interval as the initial conditions for the next time step. Hence, basically the equation of motion
(non-linear in that k and c changes at every time interval but constant within the interval) is solved for at each and
every time step, the initial conditions at each time step being the displacement and velocity calculated at the end of
the previous time interval. Also, the P(t) is unique for each and every time interval.
m&u&( t )
p(t)
k(t)u(t)
m
u(t)
c(t)u&(t)
The general nonlinear Newton’s dynamic equation of motion at time ti can be written as
m&
u&i + c i u&i + k i u i = Pi
The incremental form of the equation of motion is then
m∆&
u&i + c i ∆u&i + k i ∆u i = ∆Pi
The choice of the time integration scheme depends on the acceleration variation function across the time step. We
shall describe the Newmark-β method, which includes the constant acceleration and linear acceleration schemes
within its formulation. The Newmark-β method states the Newmark equations as
1
∆u&i = &
u&i ∆t + γ∆&
u&i ∆t and ∆u i = u&i ∆t + &u&i ∆t 2 + β∆&
u&i ∆t 2
2
When γ is anything other than 0.5, superfluous damping is introduced into the system. Hence it is usually taken as
γ = 0.5. β can vary from 1/6 to ½ but is unconditionally stable only as long as β ≥ 0.25 (γ + 0.5)2. When β is ¼, the
Newmark equations can be obtained from assuming the constant acceleration method (unconditionally stable)
1
&
u&( t ) = (& u&i +1 )
u&i + &
2
508
Second Edition
and when β is 1/6, the Newmark equations can be obtained from assuming the linear acceleration method
(conditional stability although implicit! note β ≥ 0.25 (γ + 0.5)2 for unconditional stability)
∆&
u&i
&
u&( t ) = &
u&i + (t − t i )
∆t
On rearranging the Newmark equations,
It is wise to choose
∆u i u& 1 γ = 0.5 No superfluous damping
∆&
u&i = − i − &
u&i
β(∆t )
2
β(∆t ) 2β 0.25 < β < 0.5 Unconditionally stable
 ∆u i u& 1 
u&i ∆t + γ
∆u&i = & − i − u&i  ∆t
&
 β(∆t )
2
β(∆t ) 2β 
γ  γ  γ
= ∆u i + 1 − &u&i ∆t − u&i
β(∆t )  2β  β
Replacing these rearranged Newmark equations into the incremental form of the equation of motion to yield only
∆ui as the unknown. This will be rearranged for ∆ui.
 ∆u i u& 1   γ  γ  γ 
m − i − &
u&i  + c i  ∆u i + 1 − &
u&i ∆t − u&i  + k i ∆u i = ∆Pi
 β(∆t )
2
β(∆t ) 2β   β(∆t )  2β  β 
This can thus be implemented on a spreadsheet and looped over numerous time steps. The procedure is described
as follows: -
(a) Choose appropriate time step ∆t
(b) Establish initial conditions noting that u(t) is relative to the static equilibrium position
u 0 , u&0 , &
u&0
For i = 0 To Number of Increments
(c) Calculate incremental displacement from

m  γ    m γ 
∆Pi +  + ∆t  − 1c i &
u&i +  + c i  u&i
 2β  2β    β(∆ t ) β 
∆u i =
1 γ
m+ ci + k i
β(∆t )
2
β(∆t )
(d) Calculate incremental velocity from
γ  γ  γ
∆u&i =∆u i + 1 − &u&i ∆t − u&i
β(∆t )  2β  β
(e) Compute displacement and velocity at new time i + 1 as
u i +1 = u i + ∆u i
u&i +1 = u&i + ∆u&i
(f) Compute the acceleration at the new time i + 1 directly from differential equation noting that c and
k may vary according to some condition on the velocity or displacement
1
&
u&i +1 = (Pi +1 − c i +1 u&i +1 − k i +1 u i +1 )
m
Next i
509
Second Edition
5 Advanced Applications of Methods of Static and Dynamic Analyses
5.1 Earthquake Induced Vibrations
5.1.1 Engineering Seismology
5.1.1.1 Seismic Risk
Seismic Risk = Hazard x Exposure x Vulnerability x Specific Loss

(assess) (assess) (reduce) (reduce)
Hazard is the probability of a potentially damaging earthquake effect occurring at the site of a construction within
its design life; It involves the level of seismic effect and the corresponding probability of occurrence. Hazard is to
be assessed by seismic hazard assessment. Exposure is the concentration of human, commercial and industrial
activity at a site subject to earthquake effects. Vulnerability is the level of damage that will be experienced by a
structure when exposed to a particular earthquake effect; Vulnerability is to be reduced by sound structural
earthquake engineering. Specific loss is the cost of restoring a structure to its original condition as a proportion of
the cost of demolition and rebuilding a similar structure; Specific loss must be minimised by sound structural
earthquake engineering. The Kobe earthquake of magnitude MS = 7.0 on 17 January 1995 in Japan left 5,420
people without life and caused US$150 billion, the largest ever single loss from an earthquake.
5.1.1.2 Physics of the Earth
Earth’s radius = 6,370 km so an arc on the surface of the planet subtending an angle of 1° at the centre has a length
of 111km. Crust is composed of brittle granitic and basaltic rocks. Crust thickness = 10–15 km in oceanic areas and
30–50 km in continental areas. Lithosphere = Outer part of mantle and the crust; It has a thickness of about 60km in
oceanic regions and 100km in continental regions; The lithosphere is the only part of the earth that exhibits brittle
characteristics and hence the only part where earthquake can occur. Focal depths greater than the thickness of the
lithosphere occur in the subduction zones where the lithosphere descends into the mantle.
5.1.1.3 Plate Tectonics
The convection currents in the asthenosphere (soft layer of about 200km in thickness below lithosphere) cause the
1-5cm/year movement of the lithosphere, which is divided into 12 major tectonic plates. The movement can be
catagorised into: -
(a) sea-floor spreading at mid-oceanic ridges as in the Atlantic Ocean
(b) subduction as in the Pacific Coast of Central and South America
(c) transcursion as along the San Andreas fault in California
5.1.1.4 Global Seismicity
The global distribution of earthquakes: -

(a) Interplate
(i) circum-Pacific belt 75%
(ii) Alpide-Asiatic belt 22%
(iii) mid-oceanic ridges 2%
(b) Intraplate
(i) Japan (significant tectonic deformation)
(ii) Australia, Northwest Europe, Brazil (cause not well understood)
510
Second Edition
5.1.1.5 Mechanism of Earthquakes: Elastic Rebound

Path: -
OBD = Buildup of stresses
σ E
EB = Elastic Rebound
Energy: -
OEF = Energy in crust before earthquake
B D EBD = Stored elastic energy ES released through
elastic waves (P-waves and S-waves) in
the elastic rebound mechanism
BDCF = Heat loss and inelastic deformation of
O ε the fault face
C F OBC = Remaining energy
5.1.1.6 Fault Rupture Classification
Dip, δ (0° < δ ≤ 90°)

Elevation View
Hanging Wall
Foot Wall (above fault plane and at the
(below fault plane) side of the dip on plan)
Plan View Strike, φ (0° ≤ φ ≤ 360°)

(Clockwise from North
measured to the fault dipping to
the right of observer, i.e. the
hanging wall on the right)
Here φ ≈ 315°.
Fault Plane View Rake or slip, λ (-180° ≤ λ ≤ +180°)

• measured in plane of fault
• measured from strike line
• measured positive upwards
λ = 0° (left-lateral)
λ = ±180° (right-lateral)
λ = +90° (reverse)
λ = -90° (normal)
Rupture Mechanism: -
(a) Horizontal strike-slip

(i) Right-lateral
(ii) Left-lateral
(b) Vertical dip-slip
(i) Normal fault (tension, hanging wall below ground level)
(ii) Reverse fault (compression, hanging wall above ground level)
(c) Oblique (dip and strike-slip)
511
Second Edition
5.1.1.7 Seismic Waves
Seismic Waves
Body Waves Surface Waves
• The reflection of P- and S-waves at the surface back

to the crust sets up a disturbance in the surface which
• Due directly to source of earthquake
then propagates along the surface; Since they are not
• Faster than surface waves; Both VP and VS =
radiated from the earthquake, they exist at some
function (elastic properties) where the stiffer the
distance from hypocentre
elastic medium the faster
• Slower than body waves; Both VLOVE and VRAYLEIGH
= function (elastic properties, wavelength)
P-Wave S-Wave
Love Wave Rayleigh Wave
(Primary Wave) (Secondary Wave)
• Shear Wave
• Compression Wave
• Transverse Wave
• Longitudinal Wave
(particle motion
(particle motion parallel • Vertically polarised like
transverse to
to propagation) sea waves; but unlike
propagation) • Horizontally
• VP > VS;
• VP > VS; sea waves, the particles
VP ~ 9 km/s polarised
VP ~ 9 km/s under the waves travel
VS ~ 5 km/s in the opposite sense
VS ~ 5 km/s
E(1 − ν)
VP = E G
ρ(1 + ν )(1 − 2ν) VS = =
2ρ(1 + ν) ρ
5.1.1.8 Accelerographs and Seismographs
Characteristics Seismographs Accelerographs

Displacement / Velocity versus time
Short period seismographs detect P- and S-
waves Acceleration versus time
Motion Recorded Vertical long-period seismographs detect Three components, namely 2 horizontal and
Rayleigh waves 1 vertical records
Horizontal long-period seismographs detect
Love waves
Date of invention 1890 1932
1-20 seconds or longer

Natural Period < 0.05 seconds
(Short period and long-period)
Installation
Far-field Near-field (close to earthquake)
Location
Continuous Standby, triggered by shaking
Operation
(will pick up earthquake instantly) (will not pick up earthquake instantly)
Film Cartridge
1 inch/minute 1 cm/second
Speed
Use of records Seismology Engineering
512
Second Edition
5.1.1.9 Earthquake Location Parameters
Parameters to define earthquake location: -

(i) Epicentre N, E ; Errors of the order of 5km
(ii) Focal depth, h0 (km); Errors of the order 10km
(iii) Origin time t0 (GMT)
5.1.1.10 Estimation of Location of Focus or Epicentre
(i) Local shallow earthquakes

(assuming constant velocity of waves, shallow depth i.e. DFOCUS ~ DEPICENTRE & no earth curvature)
 V V 
Distance of hypocentre (focus) from station, D FOCUS =  P S δT
 VP − VS 
Three stations’ records of DFOCUS are necessary to estimate the location of the focus or epicentre.
(ii) Non-local earthquakes

Use travel-time curves. By inputting the difference in travel times, δT between two phases, we can obtain
the epicentral distance ∆° in degrees (x 111km to change to km) for any particular focal depth.
5.1.1.11 Estimation of Focal Depth
(i) From visual inspection of the seismogram, deep earthquakes have weak surface waves; Shallow waves are a
clear indication of a shallow focus. For deep earthquakes use depth phases (pP, sS, etc)
(ii) If all else fails, assign arbitrary value of 10km or 33km
5.1.1.12 Estimation of Time of Earthquake Occurrence
Input: -
Absolute time that the first earthquake wave reaches station, AT
Distance from station to epicentre, D
Focal depth, h
Depth of topmost crust layer, d1
Compute: -
Velocity at the topmost crust layer of d1, V1
Velocity at the second crust layer, V2
Using Snell’s Law, compute iC
sin i sin r sin i C sin 90°
= , hence =
V1 V2 V1 V2
Output: -
The travel time from focus to station is the lesser time in the following phases: -
D2 + h2
Tg =
V1
d1 (d − h ) D − (d 1 − h ) tan i C − d 1 tan i C
T* = + 1 +
V1 cos i C V1 cos i C V2
Hence, the absolute time of earthquake = AT – travel time
513
Second Edition
5.1.1.13 Earthquake Magnitude
(a) Moment Magnitude, MW based on Seismic Moment M0

Proportional to the actual rupture slip displacement size of the earthquake, U(m)
Seismic Moment, M0 = measures the size of an earthquake rupture
= work done in rupturing the fault
= µAU Nm (~ 1015 – 1030)
where the rigidity of the crust = µ ~ 3 x 1010 (Nm-2)
displacement = U ~ 10-4 of rupture length of large earthquakes (m)
area = A (m2)
Moment Magnitude, MW = (2/3)log10(M0) – 10.7
Wells and Coppersmith (1994) proposed an equation to estimate the earthquake potential of a fault of a
given length, namely,
where SRL is the surface rupture length in kilometers and
This based on the fact that rupture length grows exponentially with magnitude.
Note that the elastic energy released grows exponentially with magnitude
log10(ES) = 11.8 + 1.5MW
where E is measured in ergs. A unit increase in magnitude corresponds to a 101.5 or 32-fold increase in
seismic energy. Energy release from a M7 event is 1000 times greater than that from a M5 event. An
observation is that ES / Volume ~ constant.
(b) Richter’s Local Magnitude, ML recalibrating for specific area

Proportional to the S-P interval δt and maximum trace amplitude A
Richter’s Local Magnitude, ML from nomogram inputting δt and maximum trace amplitude A (mm), or
Richter’s Local Magnitude, ML = log (A) – log (A0) of Richter’s tables inputting maximum amplitudes
A (mm) and epicentral distance from station, ∆ (km).
(c) Teleseismic Magnitude Scales, MS and mb

Proportional to the maximum ratio of ground amplitude A (µm) to period of ground motion T (s) and
hence independent of the type of seismograph
A
Surface wave magnitude, M S = log  + 1.66 log( ∆°) + 3.3 (using long - period instruments)
 T  MAX
A
Body wave magnitude, m b = log  + Q( ∆, h ) (using short - period instruments)
 T  MAX
514
Second Edition
Teleseismic Magnitudes
Moment Magnitude, MW Local Magnitude, ML
MS & mb
Does not saturate at large Saturates at large Saturates at large
earthquakes earthquakes earthquakes
Saturation refers to the fact that beyond a certain level, an increase in seismic energy release does not produce a
corresponding increase in magnitude. This happens because the scales are based on readings of waves in a limited
period range (determined by the characteristics of the instrument) and as the size of the earthquake source grows
the additional energy release results in waves of larger period rather than increasing the amplitude of shorter period
radiation.
Some major earthquakes of the 20th century are presented.
The 1989 Loma Prieta earthquake resulted in about 7 billion dollars in damage, not accounting for the loss of
business opportunities. The total financial loss induced in the 1994 Northridge earthquake is estimated to be over
10 billion dollars.
515
Second Edition
5.1.1.14 Evaluation of Regional Seismicity
(a) The maximum credible earthquake MMAX is first found from either
(i) the maximum length of fault rupture that could physically occur
log (L) = 0.7MS – 3.24 etc…
(ii) MMAX = MMAX KNOWN TO OCCUR + ∆M
(b) It is found that a linear relationship exists between frequency and magnitude,
log (N) = a – b.M (Recurrence relationship by Gutenberg & Richter, 1954)
N = number of earthquakes per year with magnitude ≥ M
a = level of earthquake activity
b = relative values of small and large earthquakes or brittleness of crust
Putting M = MMAX, we can compute N.
(c) Return Period, T = 1/N
Log N
Due to fact that small

earthquakes not always
detected, i.e. incomplete
catalougue
∆b
∆a
M
∆a due to saturation of scale at high M
∆b due to period of observation being too
short in comparison to the return period
of large earthquake
5.1.1.15 Intensity
Intensity is an index related to the strength of the ground shaking and is not a measure parameter.
Intensity III limit of perceptibility

Intensity VII threshold of damage to structures
Intensity VIII threshold of damage to engineered structures
Intensity X realistic upper bound
Intensity worked out by taking the modal value of an intensity histogram.
5.1.1.16 Characterisation of Strong Motion
Horizontal and vertical Peak Ground Acceleration (PGA) is the most widely used parameter although it really
represents the damage for only stiff structures since damage of a structure is also a function of its period.
Acceleration
Peak Ground Acceleration

Spectral
516
Second Edition
Other parameters such as cycles of motion, frequency of motion and duration not taken into account.
PGA also does not correlate well with earthquake damage, except for stiff structures such as 1 storey brick
buildings. The strong ground motion can also be characterised by the peak values of velocity and displacement
obtained by the integration of the earthquake time-history. PGA correlates well with intensity; for damaging motion
(intensity VIII), we find PGA ≥ 0.2g.
A widely used measure of damage potential is the energy in an accelerogram known as the Arias intensity.
π T
IA =
2g ∫
0
a 2 ( t )dt
5.1.1.17 Attenuation Relationship

PGA = b1e b 2M d − b3 e − b 4d
The coefficients are determined by regression analysis on a database of accelerograms’ PGA and their associated
magnitudes and distances.
PGV and PGD poor because the integration of acceleration time history heavily influenced by the errors associated
with analogue accelograms and the processing procedures (filters) that are applied to the records to compensate for
them. Also, the integration assumes initial values of zero for velocity and displacement although for analogue
recordings, the first readings are lost and hence, this may not be the case. Small errors in baseline estimation of
acceleration cause great errors in velocity and displacement.
517
Second Edition
5.1.1.18 Seismic Hazard Evaluation Procedure: Seismic Hazard Curves and Seismic Hazard Maps
The objective of seismic hazard assessment is to determine the probability of exceedance of a particular level of
PGA at the site under consideration.
(a) Seismic hazard curves are produced for a particular point or site: -
(i) Choose design life-span L for structure, say 50 years
(ii) Determine seismic source points, I (seismic source lines and seismic source areas or zones could be
converted to a number of seismic source points). Seismic source zones are delimited from catalogues of
historical earthquakes.
(iii) For each earthquake source i, determine MiMAX and hence PGAiMAX
For each source i
determine MiMAX knowing MS α log(rupture length) and catalogues of historical earthquakes
using attenuation log(PGA) = c1 + c2M – c3log(d2 + h02)1/2 – c4(d2 + h02)1/2 compute PGAiMAX
End For
(iv) Determine LARGEST(PGAiMAX)
(v) Choose a PGA ≤ LARGEST(PGAiMAX) and compute Mi for each source
For each source i
using attenuation log(PGA) = c1 + c2M – c3log(d2 + h02)1/2 – c4(d2 + h02)1/2 compute Mi
End For
Note that PGA of 0.2g corresponds to Intensity VIII that causes structural damage
(vi) Compute annual frequencies Ni from recurrence relationships particular to each source
For each source i
log(Ni) = a – bMi , parameters obtained from catalogues of instrumental seismicity
End For
If Mi > MiMAX then put Ni = 0 T
(vii) Compute percentage of probability of exceedance, q
i =i q
−L ∑ Ni
PGA
q = 1 − e i =1 (based on Poisson probability model)
(viii) Compute return period T PGA
T = 1 / ΣN
(ix) Plot a point on the seismic hazard curves q vs PGA and T vs PGA
(x) Loop to (iv) until complete plot of seismic hazard curves q vs PGA and T vs PGA is obtained
(b) Hazard map showing the contours of PGA for a site with a specific probability of exceedance q or a certain
return period T is obtained by drawing a hazard curve at numerous grid points and reading off the PGA for a
particular q or T. Remember that q, T, L and N are related by
i =i
−L ∑ Ni
q = 1 − e i =1 (Poisson) and T = 1 / ΣN
The Poisson distribution is stationary with time i.e. independent of time, hence the probability of earthquake
occurring the year after is the same. Thus no elastic rebound theory inculcated. The hazard map allows the
engineer to obtain a design PGA for a particular q or T. However, this value of PGA does not characterise the
nature of strong motion and it is also of little use as an input to structural analysis except for an infinitely stiff
structures. For general structures, we employ the design response spectra.
Acceleration

Spectral
(c) Uncertainties in Seismic Hazard Assessment

(i) Uncertain scatter in attenuation relationship T
(ii) Uncertain limits of source zone and hence the value of MMAX
(iii) Uncertain choice of attenuation relationship
518
Second Edition
5.1.1.19 Seismic Hazard Evaluation Procedure: Design Response Spectra
The response spectrum is a graph showing the maximum response of a range of SDOF systems, with a specific
level of damping, subjected to a particular accelerogram (i.e. strong-motion). A SDOF is fully characterised by its
damping level ζ and its natural period of vibration T = 2π(m/k)–½. The response spectrum is plotted by calculating
the response of a series of SDOF systems (with differing T but same ζ) subjected to a particular acceleration time-
history at their base. Hence the response spectrum is a plot of relative displacement, relative velocity or absolute
acceleration versus period T.
Spectral Acceleration

(PGA), which corresponds to the
response for an infinitely stiff Effect of sub-soil layers
SDOF system or structure; above bedrock
rock
T Effect of period of the

Period of structure SDOF system or structure
should avoid plateau on their response
PGA is the response on an infinitely stiff SDOF system. The inclusion of the period of the SDOF system gives rise
to the response spectrum. The effect of softer and less stiff (more flexible) sub-soil layer above the stiff bedrock
changes the response spectrum in the following manners: -
(i) Amplitude of the response increases
Velocity of propagation is less in soil than in bedrock. In order to maintain the energy carried by the waves, the
amplitude increases and the amount depends upon the contrast in propagation velocity in the soil and the
bedrock, the softer the soil, the greater the amplification.
(ii) Amplitude of the spectrum increases dramatically if resonance occurs
If the dominant period of the ground motion (large earthquakes tend to produce dominant long-period waves
whilst smaller earthquakes produce short period waves) i.e. T1 = 4H/S coincides with the natural period of
vibration of the soil layer, then resonant response can result in very high amplitudes on the spectrum at that
particular period. This happened in Mexico City on the 19th of September 1985 where a large MS 8.1
earthquake caused greatest damage in the city underlain by soft lacustrine clay deposits although 400km away
from the source.
(iii) Duration of strong motion increases
Waves can be reflected at the surface and then as they propagate downwards they can again be reflected back
upwards at the rock face and in this way become trapped within the soil layer. This will have the effect of
increasing the duration of the strong ground-motion.
(iv) Maximum amplitude occur at higher periods for soil spectra and at lower periods for rock spectra
This occurs because softer soil (less stiff, more flexible, lower frequency, higher period) tend to amplify high
period waves and harder rock (more stiff, less flexible, higher frequency, lower period) tend to amplify low
period waves.
(v) PGA reduces
The value of the PGA is also dependent upon the sub-soil conditions (stiffness) although not usually taken into
account in the attenuation relationship. A soft (flexible) soil will tend to reduce the value of the PGA as low
period (high frequency) waves are filtered by the soft soil.
519
Second Edition
The earthquake magnitude M and the distance d change the response spectra in the following manner. Small nearby
earthquake produce high frequency dominant waves. Large faraway earthquakes produce low frequency dominant
waves.
The seismic hazard assessment procedure by the method of design response spectrum involves either: -
(a) PGA determination from hazard map and spectral shape fixation from codes of practice
PGA = corresponds to the response for an infinitely stiff SDOF system or structure
= obtained from the hazard map
= function of (M, distance d, return period T and probability of exceedance q) although also
dependent upon the soil stiffness
Spectral Shape = corresponds to the response of a variety SDOF system or structure with different
stiffnesses (or periods)
= function of (SDOF or structure period, soil stiffness) although also a function of the
earthquake magnitude in that the peak amplitude varies with M
Acceleration
Spectral
M7
M6
T M5
(b) Response spectral ordinates
The response spectrum can also be obtained from equations predicting the response spectral ordinates.
Such equations are derived in exactly the same way as attenuation relationships for PGA for a number
of different response periods.
Response spectral ordinate equation = function of (M, distance d, SDOF period T, soil stiffness)
The response spectra by including the PGA, the spectral shape and its amplitude, accounts for M, d, the structural
periods T and soil stiffness. The response spectrum falls short in the sense that the duration of the earthquake not
accounted for. Long duration earthquakes are obviously more damaging. Duration is a function of M, the larger the
M, the longer the duration.
The larger the earthquake the longer the duration, the longer the period of the waves and the larger the spectral
amplitudes.
520
Second Edition
5.1.2 Effect of Local Soil Conditions on the Seismic Hazard

5.1.2.1 Elastic Soil Properties
The elastic properties of soil are defined by the following 3 parameters: -

(a) the mass density, ρ
(b) the elastic moduli

(i) the shear wave velocity S or VS is measured
S or VS obtained from explosion tests, or
S or VS = 85 N600.17 (Dm)0.2 (Seed 1986 empirical using SPT and CPT tests)
(ii) Shear modulus G is computed from the shear wave velocity S
µ G
S= =
ρ ρ
(iii) Poisson’s ratio ν known

(iv) Young’s Modulus E computed
E
G=
2(1 + ν)
(v) Lame’s constant λ computed; Note the other Lame’s constant µ
Eν
λ= µ=G
(1 + ν )(1 − 2ν)
(vi) compression wave velocity C is computed

λ + 2µ
C=
ρ
(c) the damping

∆W = area under loop
σ = energy lost in one loading-unloading-
reloading cycle
W = area under the triangle
γ 1 ∆W
Damping coefficient, ζ =
4π W
Logarithmic decrement, δ = 2πζ
521
Second Edition
5.1.2.2 Dynamic Response of Soil
The dynamic response of soil depends upon: -

(a) whether the loading is small strain loading or large strain loading
Earthquake loading may either be small strain or large strain. The shear modulus G and damping ζ of the soil
depends on the strain level, hence non-linear behaviour. The shear modulus is represented by the secant
modulus at any given strain. G ζ
γ γ
Small Strain Loading Large Strain Loading

High G, low ζ Low G, high ζ
Soil cannot be modeled as viscoelastic material as it
is non-linear. Ground motion controlled by limit
Soil can be modeled as viscoelastic material
strength of soil. Hence the critical acceleration i.e.
the limit acceleration the soil can transmit is used.
Field measurements of shear wave velocities In general, G at any strain level can be related to
generally give those at very low strain levels. This GMAX although the relationship differs from soil to
yields the maximum shear modulus GMAX. soil.
(b) whether the loading is monotonic or cyclic

Dry soils or
drained Undrained saturated soils
saturated soils
No change in Collapsible soil Non-collapsible soil
strength with
cycles. τ τ
Behaviour
under cyclic
loading same γ γ
as that under
monotonic Pore pressures rise continuously with cycles Pore pressures rise then tend to decrease
loading. Strength peaks and then reaches residual Strength increases
Strain softening material Strain hardening material
Stress (in the form of liquefaction) and Strain is the criteria for failure, whilst stress
strain is the criteria for failure failure (in the form of liquefaction) unlikely
Loose cohesionless sands Dense sands
Normally consolidated clays Overconsolidated clays
Note that the damping increases with cyclic loading.
(c) the frequency of the loading
(d) the speed of loading i.e. the rate of strain
Sand: the strain-rate has little effect on the strength
Clay: the strain-rate has considerable effect on the strength
(e) whether sliding occurs or not
If sliding occurs, strain is no longer applicable.
(f) the stress path
The undrained strength and the pore water pressures are stress path dependent and therefore limit strength of
soil depend on how the failure state is arrived at. Since a soil element is subjected to 3 normal stresses and 3
shear stresses, the limit strength will depend on how each component is varied in the field during an
earthquake.
522
Second Edition
5.1.2.3 Liquefaction
Liquefaction means failure due to rise on pore water pressures, and is not necessarily associated with a complete
loss of strength. Hence, liquefaction is denoted by either of the following mechanisms: -
(a) ZERO EFFECTIVE STRESS IN LOOSE SOILS: Zero effective stress (and hence zero shear strength, i.e.
complete loss of strength) occurs due to rise in pore water pressures; this occurs when the structure of loose
saturated cohesionless soil collapses due to vibration and cyclic loading. When shear stress is applied under no
volume change condition, some grains may lose contact with neighbouring grains, and therefore part of the load is
taken up by the water. Thus excess pore water pressure is generated. On unloading, these grains do not go back to
its original position and therefore, the excess pore water pressure remains. On further loading or reverse loading,
more grains lose contact and more excess pore pressure is generated. Finally, after a number of cycles, if there is
the possibility for all grains to separate from each other, then the entire load before cycling is taken up by the water
and true liquefaction occurs. For this state to occur, the soil must be in very loose state at the beginning. After
liquefaction, the liquefied soil will end up in a denser state in time through the dissipation of the excess pore
pressure. In such a soil, collapse of the soil may take place even in static loading and shows very low residual
strength.
(b) CYCLIC MOBILITY IN MEDIUM DENSE TO DENSE SOILS: Cyclic mobility i.e. the accumulation of
large strains (or displacement along a shear surface) during cyclic loading is caused by the reduction of effective
strength as a result of accumulation of pore water pressure. In defining cyclic mobility, there is thus no association
with a complete loss of strength. However, the accumulation of strain may become very large and the soil may be
considered as failed although the strength of the soil does not decrease as a whole even after failure.
CYCLIC MOBILITY IN
ZERO EFFECTIVE STRESS IN LOOSE SOILS
MEDIUM DENSE TO DENSE SOILS
(Collapsible)
(Non-Collapsible)
Loose soils Medium dense to dense soils
Low residual strength Strength of soil does not decrease as a whole
Low strains Large strains signifying failure
The cause of liquefaction in the field is the collapse of loose saturated cohesionless soils due to either: -
(a) cyclic loading, or
(b) static loading (quick sand conditions)
Manifestations of the liquefaction phenomenon include: -

(a) Bearing capacity failure in level ground causing tilting and sinking of structures
(b) Ground oscillation on very mild slopes, no lateral spreading but ground breaks into blocks which oscillate
causing the opening and closing of fissures
(c) Lateral spreading of mild slopes with a cut or free slope due to the liquefaction of sub-surface deposits; ground
breaks up causing large fissures and the ground generally moves slowly down the slope
(d) Flow failure of steep slopes due to liquefaction of the slope causing landslides, common in mine tailings
(e) Sand boils which are evidence of high pore water pressures at some depth due to liquefaction
(f) Rise of buried structures such as water tanks and timber piles which are lighter than the liquefied deposits
(g) General ground settlement occurring due to the densification of deposits after liquefaction
(h) Failure of quay walls (retaining walls) due to the increase of pressure on the wall as a result of liquefaction
5.1.2.4 Residual Strength of Liquefied Soils
The residual strength of liquefied soil is an important parameter for estimating the stability of liquefied soils. The
residual strength depends mainly on the void ratio but several other factors are noted, namely the initial confining
pressure, the soil fabric, the fines content and the particle size and shape. The strength increases with increasing
overconsolidation ratio. Increasing fines content decreases the steady strength at the same relative density.
523
Second Edition
5.1.2.5 Assessment of Liquefaction Potential
The liquefaction potential of a site depends on: -

(a) the size of the earthquake measured by MS or MW, preferably the latter
(b) the distance of the earthquake from the site
(c) the CRR values in terms of N160 or qc1N or VS1 of the deposits
(d) the position of the water table with respect to the deposits
Liquefaction is most likely in loose saturated cohesionless sands. Gravelly soils being more permeable are unlikely
to liquefy, although liquefaction of sandy gravel has occurred in the Kobe earthquake. But generally, the
liquefaction resistance of sand-gravel composites increases considerably with increasing gravel content. Most
clayey soils on the other hand are not vulnerable to liquefaction. However, laboratory studies indicate some loss of
strength during cyclic loading and cyclic mobility may be significant. Increased plasticity generally increases the
cyclic strength. The assessment of the liquefaction potential is as follows: -
aMAX.g
h γ
τ
liquefiable soil layer
(a) Cyclic stress ratio CSR

The CSR depends on the shear stress imposed by the earthquake as a function of the initial effective
overburden pressure. This therefore depends primarily on the magnitude and distance of the earthquake, the
depth of the liquefiable soil, the depth of the water table and the characteristics of the soil layer.
CSR = τ / σ’ = 0.65 (aMAX) (γh/σ’) rd
where h = depth to point of measurement or liquefiable soil
rd = rigidity of soil to include the effect of more flexible soil at depth, hence lower shear stresses
= generally, rd varies from 1 at the surface to 0.9 at 10m depth
= a function of the depth to the liquefiable layer, for instance 1-0.00765z (Liao & Whitman 1986)
γh = total overburden pressure at the level of the liquefiable layer
σ’ = effective overburden pressure at the level of the liquefiable layer
aMAX = peak ground acceleration at site from an attenuation relationship based on a maximum MW
log(aMAX) = –1.02 + 0.249MWMAX – log(r) – 0.0025r where r2 = Rf2+53.3 (Joyner & Boore 1981)
note that τ = mass/area x acceleration = γh/g x apeak
note that γh/σ’ takes the position of the water table into account
note that 0.65 of aMAX represents 95% energy of the record
note that as with most attenuation relationships, aMAX is the numerical fraction of g
(b) Cyclic resistance ratio CRR

The CRR depends on the quality of the soil and the depth of the liquefiable layer. This is defined as the cyclic
stress required to cause liquefaction in a given number of cycles expressed as a fraction of the initial effective
confining pressure. CRR is the required CSR for liquefaction. The CRR values are usually determined for
liquefaction at 15 cycles of loading representing a 7.5 magnitude earthquake. Since the number of cycles is a
function of the duration of the earthquake, which in turn depends on the magnitude, CRR is dependent on the
magnitude of the earthquake as well. The factors effecting the CRR are void ratio and relative density,
overconsolidation ratio, fines content and plasticity of fines. CRR can be determined from shear box and
triaxial tests, but field measurements are preferable. CRR can be determined in the field by either one of the
following methods: -
(i) CRR from SPT (standard penetration test) blow count N procedure
Normalised SPT value to depth and energy efficiency N160 = N.CN E / 60
where N = measured blow count
524
Second Edition
CN = depth normalisation factor = (100/σ’)0.5 or 0.77log10(2145/σ’)

σ’ = effective stress at the point of measurement i.e. at the depth of the liquefiable soil (kPa)
E = energy efficiency of the SPT (%)
CRR = function of (N160, MW, fines content) obtained through field observation of liquefaction
(ii) CRR from CPT (cone penetration test) tip resistance qc procedure
CPT is better than SPT in the sense that it provides a continuous reading unlike SPT which are taken at
intervals. Also, repeatability with SPT tests is poor.
Normalised CPT value qc1N = qc (100 / σ’)0.5 / 100
where qc = measured tip resistance (kPa)
CRR = function of (qc1N, MW, fines content)
(iii) Shear wave velocity procedure

The use of S or VS is advantageous because this can be measured easily with accuracy in soils in which SPT
and CPT are difficult to perform. The disadvantage is that it is measured in situ with very small strains.
Moreover, seismic testing is done without extracting samples and as such, difficult to identify non-liquefiable
low velocity layers (soft clay rich soils) or liquefiable high velocity layers (weakly cemented soils). However,
shear wave velocity measurements along with bore-hole data becomes very usable.
Normalised shear wave velocity VS1 = VS (100 / σ’)0.25
where VS = measured shear wave velocity
CRR = function of (VS1, MW, fines content)
(c) Factor of safety against liquefaction

FL = CRR / CSR
Note that if FL > 1.0, then no liquefaction.
CSR Base curve for MW = 7.5 and a certain % of fines

Liquefaction Inputs: CSR and N160 or qc1N or VS1
No Output: whether liquefaction occurs or not
Liquefaction
N160 or qc1N or VS1
Note that, for the same N value, higher percentage of fines shows higher CRR.
There is good agreement between the SPT and CPT procedures. Beyond N160 > 30 or qc1N > 160, according to
the NCEER (1997), liquefaction is very unlikely to occur. The base curves are plotted for a MW of 7.5. For
other magnitudes, scaling factors (MSF) are proposed which multiply the CRR base curves.
The reason that large magnitude earthquakes may liquefy sites at large distances even though the corresponding
acceleration is small is due to the longer duration and therefore to the larger number of cycles. Liquefaction can be
achieved by smaller number of cycles with large stress amplitudes and by larger number of cycles with smaller
stress amplitudes.
5.1.2.6 Post-Seismic Failure due to Liquefaction
The consolidation of a liquefiable soil at a depth underneath a competent soil with time may increase the pore
pressures in the top layer causing bearing capacity failure some time after the earthquake. The upward flow may
even cause piping failure. The delay depends on the relative consolidation and swelling properties of the two
layers.
525
Second Edition
5.1.2.7 Methods of Improving Liquefiable Soils
(a) Remove and replace unsatisfactory material (i.e. loose saturated cohesionless sands)
(b) Densify the loose deposits
(c) Improve material by mixing additives
(d) Grouting or chemical stabilisation
(e) Draining solutions
5.1.2.8 Effect of Soil Layer on Ground Response
The effect of local soil layer is as follows: -

(a) Impedance (or radiation) effect, hence increase in amplitude of strong motion
(b) Increase in duration of strong motion as energy becomes trapped within soil layer
(c) Resonance effect, hence a great increase in amplitude of strong motion
We consider vertically propagating polarised shear wave in energy transfer because: -

(a) due to the continuously decreasing stiffness of the soil or rock material, the wave front appears to travel
vertically; an elastic wave propagating to a less stiff material (such as from stiffer rock to soil) will begin to
propagate slower, since VS = (G/ρ)0.5 i.e. VS ∝ G0.5 ∝ E0.5 and ρrock ~ ρsoil. A wave propagating slower will tend
to move towards the normal to the interface between the 2 mediums.
(b) at a reasonable distance form the focus, these spherically propagating waves may be considered as plane
propagating waves in a narrow wave front
(c) the energy carried by the shear waves is more important than that carried by the compression waves, these two
waves being the only two emitted from the focus
5.1.2.9 Motion of Shear Waves in Elastic Media
The motion of shear waves in elastic an elastic medium is given by the equation of motion
∂ 2u 2 ∂ u ∂ 2u 
2
= s  + η 
∂t 2  ∂y
2
∂y 2 
for which the solution is

u = Ae -λΩs/S e iΩ ( y / S− t )
where s = distance travelled within damped soil (m)
y = vertical displacement (m)
t = time (s)
S = shear wave velocity (ms -1 )
Ω = circular frequency of the wave (rad/s) = 2πf = 2π / T
λ = ηΩ/2 (damping as a fraction of critical)
Ae -λΩs/S = decaying amplitude term suggesting higher frequency waves decay faster
e iΩ ( y / S− t ) = harmonic term, i.e. same response shown periodically
526
Second Edition
5.1.2.10 Impedance (or Radiation) Effect
The impedance effect occurs because of the contrast of properties at the rock-soil interface.
A B
H
ROCK SOIL
Arefracted
Sr, ρr Ss, ρs
Ain Areflected
(a) Impedance relationships

A in = Amplitude of incoming wave
2 1− r Sρ
A refracted = A in & A reflected = A in where r = s s
1+ r 1+ r Sr ρ r
(b) Amplitude of concern, Aboundary
The wave motion at the boundary is the same whether one looks at it from the first or the second medium.
A boundary = A refracted
= A in + A reflection
For r = 0 : free boundary with A boundary = 2A in
r < 1 : rock to soil with A refracted > A in
r > 1 : soil to rock with A refracted < A in
r = 1 : no boundary with A refracted = A in
(c) Typical values
S s = 300 ms −1 , S r = 3000ms −1 , ρ s ≈ ρ r ,
∴ r = 0.1, A refracted = 1.82A in & A reflected = 0.82A in
Notice that the soil has amplified the motion of the waves as they were impeded.
(d) Computation procedure for first half-cycle of strong-motion at site ASOIL@B
INPUT : A ROCK@A is an A boundary obtained from the attenuation relationship from a seismic hazard analysis
METHOD : A in = Amplitude of incoming wave = A ROCK@A / 2 as A boundary = 2A in
2 Sρ
: A refracted = A in where r = s s
1+ r Sr ρ r
OUTPUT : A SOIL@B = 2A refracted e -λΩs/S as A boundary = 2A in
On the soil spectra, the effect of impedance is as follows: -

(a) Amplitude of the response increases
The effect of impedance is to increase the amplitude of the strong motion response. Velocity of propagation is less
in soil than in bedrock. In order to maintain the energy carried by the waves, the amplitude increases and the
amount depends upon the contrast in propagation velocity in the soil and the bedrock, the softer the soil, the greater
the amplification. The energy flux of the incident wave is shared between the refracted and reflected waves.
527
Second Edition
5.1.2.11 Increase in Duration of Strong Motion
Waves can be reflected at the surface and then as they propagate downwards they can again be reflected back
upwards at the rock face and in this way become trapped within the soil layer. This will have the effect of
increasing the duration of the strong ground-motion. Computation of strong motion response with time: -
(a) Establish the input
Duration of earthquake wave D (s)
Fundamental period of earthquake wave T (s)
Damping of soil ζ
Relative property of soil-rock r = Ssρs / Srρr
Relative property of rock-soil r = Srρr / Ssρs
(b) Establish the changes in amplitude
A B
A1 A1 A3 A3 A5 A5
H
ROCK SOIL
Arefracted
Sr, ρr A2 A4 Ss, ρs
Ain
(i) Ain = AROCK / 2

(ii) Arefracted = 2Ain/(1+r) @ t=0 for duration D
(iii) A1 = Arefracted e-ζΩs/S @ t=H/S for duration D
(iv) A2 = (1-r)/(1+r) A1 e-ζΩs/S @ t=2H/S for duration D
(v) A3 = A2 e-ζΩs/S @ t=3H/S for duration D
(vi) A4 = (1-r)/(1+r) A3 e-ζΩs/S @ t=4H/S for duration D
(vii) etc…Ainfinity until negligible amplitudes
(c) Superpose waves at the top of soil layer for an estimate of a measured record
A sinusoidal wave of 2A1 starting @ t=H/S for duration D
A sinusoidal wave of -2A3 starting @ t=3H/S for duration D
A sinusoidal wave of 2A5 starting @ t=5H/S for duration D
A sinusoidal wave of -2A7 starting @ t=7H/S for duration D
etc…
All the individual waves have the same period and duration. Their amplitudes are doubled because
of the free surface boundary. Every other wave has an opposite initial amplitude because when the
waves get reflected at the bottom of the soil against the rock, there is a 180 degree phase change.
These superposed waves will result in a summation wave that is increasing to a peak then decaying
gradually.
2A1 wave
-2A3 wave
(d) Check if resonance is likely to occur

Evidently, if the period of the initial earthquake incident wave is 4H/S, this would correspond to
one loop cycle and resonance would occur. Also, resonance can occur if the earthquake wave
period corresponds to the higher mode periods of the soil. In summary, if the earthquake period is
any of the following, then resonance can occur.
Mode periods of the soil Tn = T1 / (2n-1), where n = 1,2,3,4… and T1 = fundamental mode period
On the soil spectra, the duration of strong ground motion is increased.
528
Second Edition
5.1.2.12 Resonance Effect
The fundamental mode of period of the soil layer, T = 4H/Ss. Hence, the period along with the damping coefficient
ζ give the layer characteristics. Thus for the same stiffness of material, the deeper the layer, the longer the period.
Alternatively, for the same depth of layer, the weaker the layer, the longer the period.
Earthquakes that can affect an engineering site: -

(a) Small earthquakes nearby (near source)
Bedrock motion is rich in high frequency waves (low period)
Shallow H and stiff (high S) subsoil (low period) will magnify the bedrock motion in resonance
Deep H and weak (low S) subsoil (high period) will not magnify the bedrock motion in resonance
(b) Large earthquakes afar (far source)
Bedrock motion is rich in low frequency waves (high period) because high frequency waves decay fast
Shallow H and stiff (high S) subsoil (low period) will not magnify the bedrock motion in resonance
Deep H and weak (low S) subsoil (high period) will magnify the bedrock motion in resonance
On the soil spectra, the effect of resonance is as follows: -

(a) Maximum amplitude occur at higher periods for soil spectra and at lower periods for rock spectra
This occurs because softer soil (less stiff, more flexible, lower frequency, higher period) tend to
amplify high period waves and harder rock (more stiff, less flexible, higher frequency, lower period)
tend to amplify low period waves.
(b) PGA reduces
The value of the PGA is also dependent upon the sub-soil conditions (stiffness) although not usually
taken into account in the attenuation relationship. A soft (flexible) soil will tend to reduce the value of
the PGA as low period (high frequency) waves are filtered by the soft soil.
(c) Amplitude of the spectrum increases dramatically if resonance occurs
If the dominant period of the ground motion (large earthquakes tend to produce dominant long-period
waves whilst smaller earthquakes produce short period waves) coincides with the natural period of
vibration of the soil layer (i.e. 4H/Ss), then resonant response can result in very high amplitudes on the
spectrum at that particular period. This happened in Mexico City on the 19th of September 1985 where
a large MS 8.1 earthquake caused greatest damage in the city underlain by soft lacustrine clay deposits
although 400km away from the source.
Near Source
Far Source
Response Spectra due to Near Source and Far Source Events
529
Second Edition
5.1.2.13 Methods of Evaluating Layer Response

Three methods can be used, namely: -
(a) The travelling wave method
This has been described in the Increase in Duration of Strong Motion section
(b) The Square Root of Sum of Squares (SRSS) method
Characteristics: -
Infinitely stiff rock base
Provides steady state and transient state solutions
Only good to find maximum acceleration AMAX, i.e. no time history response
Damping coefficient refers to the modal damping
If we treat soil as an elastic material, then a column of soil over the rock (assumed rigid since Sr >> Ss) behaves
like any other structure which has natural modes and mode shapes. The solution to such a problem is
∞
&
u&( y, t ) = ∑ Φ ( y, n ) I ( t , n )
n =1
Φ ( y, n ) = mode shapes depending on geometry and boundary conditions
I(t, n) = response of SDOF systems of mode frequencies subjected to the applied load
Thus, a soil layer (or any elastic structure resting on a rigid base) is equivalent to a series of SDOF pendulums
(characterised by their ω and λ) standing on a single rigid base. The total response of the soil layer is obtained
by combining all the responses of each SDOF system.
~4
Peak acceleration, &
u&( y) MAX = ∑Φ
n =1
2
( y, n )S a2 (n )
Sa is the equivalent acceleration spectrum values of the acceleration record. Note only 4 modes are used in the
SRSS method. Note also that y=0 at the free surface and is measure positive downward.
INPUT: soil damping ζ, forcing frequency Ω (rad/s), soil layer H (m), soil shear velocity Ss (ms-1)
Mode Period of system Frequency of system,
n Sa = function (ζ, Ω, ω) φ2 Sa2 φ2 x Sa2
shapes, φ T = 4H / [(2n-1)S] ω = 2π/T
1
.
.
4
AMAX = SQRT(Σn=1-4 φ2 x Sa2)
(c) The SHAKE method
Characteristics: -
Base rock is considered flexible, hence radiation damping i.e. waves that travel into the rock from the
soil, is taken into account
Provides only steady state solution
Gives time history response
Different layers can have different damping coefficients
In this technique, a single harmonic component of the wave can be transferred from any known point to any
other desired point by the use of a complex transfer function. By using Fourier Series of the known motion,
each component of the series can be transferred to the desired point and by using the superposition technique,
these component waves can be recombined to produce the time history of the motion at the desired point.
Hence, the SHAKE method is summarised as follows: -
I. input is the ground motion f(t)
II. f(t) is decomposed into multiple frequency Ω waves each having an amplitude A and phase θ
III. for each component wave Ω,
the transfer function of amplitude T and of phase φ is computed
output wave component amplitude is TA and phase is θ + φ
next component wave
IV. the output wave components are superimposed for a time history response
530
Second Edition
5.1.2.14 Critical Acceleration
Small Strain Loading Large Strain Loading

Soil cannot be modeled as viscoelastic material as it
is non-linear. Ground motion controlled by limit
Soil can be modeled as viscoelastic material
strength of soil. Hence the critical acceleration i.e.
the limit acceleration the soil can transmit is used.
A B
h
weak layer
ROCK SOIL
(a) Limit undrained strength of weak layer, cu

∆u = B[∆σ 3 + A (∆σ1 − ∆σ 3 )] (Skempton' s)
c' cos φ'+ σ' [K 0 + A (1 − K 0 )]sin φ'
Undrained strength, c u =
1 - (1 - 2A)sinφ'
Note that the change of pore water pressure ∆u is dependent upon the change of principal stresses due to an
earthquake. For saturated soils, B = 1. Under cyclic loading the pore pressure parameter A changes with cycles.
The effect of rotation of the principal stresses is not taken into account. The undrained strength depends upon
the change of pore water pressures. Hence, both ∆u and cu are dependent upon the number of cycles.
(b) Applied stress at weak layer, τ
Applied stress, τ = force/area x acceleration
= m/A x a = ρVa/A = ρhAa/A = ρha
= γha/g (i.e. total stress / g x acceleration)
= γhkmg/g as a = kmg
= γhkm
(c) Critical acceleration
When τ = cu then the acceleration is critical
For c’ = 0,
τ = cu
α= 0
[K + A(1 − K 0 )]sin φ'
γhkc = σ1’α
1 - (1 - 2A)sinφ'
kc = σ1’α/γh
= α σ1’/σ1
For c’=0, and say φ’=30°, K0=0.6, sinφ’=0.5, A=0.4 and with water table at ground level, kc = 0.42γ’/γ =
0.2. This means that, the weak soil layer will fail if a=0.2g.
(d) Consequences
If the elastic response predicted a magnified acceleration at B of say 0.5g from an incoming acceleration of 0.2g
at A, this non-linear critical acceleration analysis will tell us that in actual fact the response at B would be
truncated to 0.2g. However, the upper part of the soil will behave like a sliding block trying to move over the
sliding surface and we may see ground cracks on the surface. This sliding block displacement is predicted by
log(umax)=f(kc/km) where kcg = critical acceleration kmg = maximum elastic acceleration
such as log(4umax/CkmgT2)=1.07-3.83kc/km (Sarma 1988);
Hence,
(i) if elastic response km < critical kc, km applies and no sliding block displacement
(ii) if elastic response km > critical kc, kc applies and there is a sliding block displacement.
531
Second Edition
5.1.2.15 Effect of Local Soil Conditions on Seismic Hazard Design Procedure Summary
The objectives of the analysis are: -
(a) to provide a soil surface acceleration response taking into account the properties of the soil layers overlying the
rock. The peak ground acceleration of the free-field rock is 0.6g from the previous seismic hazard assessment
of Section 5.1.1.18.
(b) to assess the liquefaction hazard of the site
5.1.2.15.1 Soil Surface Acceleration Response
(a) Design Rock PGA from the Seismic Hazard Analysis
(b) Design Free-Field Rock Acceleration Time History
Plot of acceleration (g) with respect to time as measured on the free-field rock scaled to the design PGA from
the hazard analysis of (a).
(c) Acceleration Spectrum of the Free-Field Record
Plot of spectral acceleration (maximum acceleration) with respect to the period of the structure. This response
spectrum shows the maximum response (in terms of acceleration) of a range of single degree of freedom
systems with a specified level of damping subjected to the above free field rock acceleration time series. The
PGA is the intersection at the vertical axis and its value is the maximum observed on the acceleration time
series of (b), i.e. the response of an infinitely stiff structure. In short: -
PGA
Accn
Time (s)
Acceleration time series of Spectral

an infinitely stiff structure Accn
(Ti , Aipeak)
PGA
Apeak Period of
Structure
Accn
Ti
Time (s)
Acceleration time series of an

finitely stiff structure of period Ti
Alternatively, the rock acceleration spectrum can be obtained from the fixation of a spectrum shape (from the
design codes) to the design rock PGA of (a). Thirdly, the rock acceleration spectrum can also be obtained from
spectral ordinates.
(d) Fourier Spectrum of the Rock Record
Plot of modulus with respect to frequency (or period) of the earthquake wave derived from the time series of
(b). The Fourier spectrum is a mathematical representation of the infinite wave harmonics that make up the
earthquake wave record time series of (b). That is to say, the earthquake record can be broken up into an
infinite number of waves defined by an amplitude and frequency. The Fourier Spectrum of the rock record is
thus the mathematical representation of the earthquake wave harmonics prior to modification due to the soil
layers. Two graphs define the Fourier spectrum, namely the modulus versus frequency graph and the phase
versus frequency graph. The frequency at which the maximum modulus occurs is the dominant frequency of
the earthquake wave time series prior to modification by the soil layers.
Fourier Spectrum = ∑a ne
i ( ωn t − φ )
(e) Shear Wave Velocity Profile

Plot of shear wave velocity with respect to depth. Shear wave velocity, VS (m/s) = 85 N600.17 (Dm)0.2 i.e. based
on the SPT. However it is best to carry out proper seismic blast tests.
(f) Transfer Function
Plot of modulus with respect to frequency of the waves derived from the shear wave velocity profile of (e).
532
Second Edition
(g) Fourier Spectrum of the Soil Surface

Plot of modulus with respect to frequency (or period) of the earthquake wave. The Fourier Spectrum of the soil
surface is the mathematical representation of the earthquake wave harmonics after the modification due to the
soil layers. These are obtained by multiplying the Fourier spectrum of the rock record by the transfer functions.
The dominant frequency of the earthquake waves are usually lower in the soil modified Fourier spectrum
compared with the rock Fourier spectrum. This is expected as the more flexible (high natural circular period)
soil layers tend to lower the frequency (or increase the period) of the earthquake waves.
(h) Design Soil Surface Acceleration Time History
Plot of acceleration (g) with respect to time obtained from the Fourier spectrum of the soil surface of (g).
(i) Acceleration Spectrum at the Soil Surface
Plot of spectral acceleration (maximum acceleration) with respect to the period of the structure. This response
spectrum shows the maximum response (in terms of acceleration) of a range of single degree of freedom
systems with a specified level of damping subjected to the above soil surface acceleration time series of (h).
The PGA is the intersection at the vertical axis and its value is the maximum observed on the acceleration time
series of (h), i.e. the response of an infinitely stiff structure.
(j) Maximum Shear Stress Profile & Shear Strength Profile
The maximum shear stress τapplied profile (plot of shear stress with respect to depth) is obtained from the
accelerations at each level of the profile. The maximum shear strength τcapacity profile is obtained from cu
c' cos φ'+ σ' [K 0 + A (1 − K 0 )]sin φ'
τ applied = c u =
1 - (1 - 2A)sinφ'
Wherever τapplied > τcapacity, the critical acceleration has been exceeded.
(k) Applied Acceleration Profile & Critical Acceleration Profile
Applied acceleration km = τapplied / γh and critical acceleration kc = τcapacity / γh.
(l) Soil Surface Design Acceleration
Define the minimum critical acceleration as the smallest critical acceleration within the soil profile considered.
Hence, the soil surface design acceleration is the smaller of: -
(a) the minimum critical acceleration kcmin, and
(b) the elastic response at the soil surface, which is given for different periods (of the SDOF structures), in the
response spectrum of (i)
(m) Effect of Large Strains on Shear Velocity
Shear Modulus, G
The shear modulus, G decreases with strain. Since shear wave

Damping %
velocity, S is proportional to G0.5, S will also decrease with large

strains. When there is large strain, soil particles are not as tightly
packed, thus the shear wave cannot travel as quickly.
The reduction in shear velocity will cause a slight reduction
in the dominant frequency of the earthquake waves because of the
increase flexibility of the soil layers. However, the consequences of
Strain % this are minimal.
(m) Sliding Block Displacement
Sliding block displacement occurs whenever km > kc
This sliding block displacement is predicted by
log(umax)=f(kc/km) where kcg = critical acceleration kmg = maximum elastic acceleration
such as log(4umax/CkmgT2)=1.07-3.83kc/km (Sarma 1988);
5.1.2.15.2 Liquefaction Hazard Analysis
Cyclic Stress Ratio CSR Cyclic Resistance Ratio CRR
Depth
Shear Soil Unit CSR =
Layer Depth normalisatio N160 = Liquefaction
Stress, τ rigidity, Weight σ' 0.65τ rd / N60
No (m) n factor, CN CNN60 if CSR>CRR
= kmγh rd (kN/m3) σ'
= (100/σ')0.5
The liquefaction hazard is ascertained from graphs of CSR versus N160.
533
Second Edition
534
Second Edition
535
Second Edition
536
Second Edition
537
Second Edition
538
Second Edition
539
Second Edition
540
Second Edition
541
Second Edition
5.1.3 Conceptual Structural Design for RC Structures in Seismic Regions 8
5.1.3.1 Plan Layout
Rectangular plan shapes are preferable to winged, T, L or U shapes. Winged structures and structures with re-
entrant corners suffer from non-uniform ductility demand distribution. Torsional effects are evident when the
centre of mass (centre of application of inertial loads) and the centre of stiffness are offset. A couple which
increases the shear forces on the columns then occur.
Also, extended buildings in plan are more susceptible to incoherent earthquake motion, being founded on different
foundation material. Aspect ratio 1 to 3 at most, otherwise use seismic joints.
Building extended in plan will be subjected to asynchronous motion especially when founded on soft ground and
should be avoided. Otherwise, seismic joints should be used to separate parts of the building along a vertical plane.
In which case, the minimum separation between two adjacent parts should be calculated to ensure that no pounding
occurs. Re-entrant corners resulting from T, L or U plan shapes attract high demands and should be avoided. The
plan stiffness and strength distribution should be carefully checked and should be close to the centre of mass to
avoid undue damaging effects of rotational response.
5.1.3.2 Elevation
The aspect ratio of the building in elevation affects the overturning moment exerted on the foundations. Low height
to width aspect ratio is desirable.
Also, very slender structures suffer from higher mode contributions, thus necessitating the use of more elaborate
seismic force calculations.
Differences of more than 20-25% in mass or stiffness between consecutive floors should be avoided. Mass
concentrations should be avoided. Stiffness discontinuity (soft storeys) should be avoided i.e. higher storeys or a
storey without infill panels whilst all other storey has should be avoided. Bridges between structures should be on
rollers to minimize interaction. Irregularities in elevation exert concentrated ductility demand such as when a multi-
bay tall building is taller in just one of the bays instead of all the bays.
The stiffness difference between two consecutive storeys should not exceed 25%. This not only implies that
column sizes should not change drastically but also means that set-backs should be kept to a minimum. The total
mass per floor should also conform to the same limits of variation. No planted columns should be allowed and no
interruption of shear walls, where provided, should be permitted. Where column size and reinforcement is reduced
with height, extreme care should be exercised at the location of such a change to ensure a uniform distribution of
ductility demand. The aspect ratio in elevation should not be excessive; a height to width ratio of about 5:1 is
reasonable. Whenever possible, the foundation level should be kept constant to avoid excessive demand being
imposed on the shorter columns responding mainly in shear.
5.1.3.3 Beam and Column Axes
All beams and columns should have the same axes with no offset between adjacent members. Avoid columns
supported on beams as imposed local demand in shear and torsion is considerable. Avoid partial infill panels as
these create short columns susceptible to failure by shear cracking, just like link beams.
8
ELNASHAI, Earthquake Engineering Seismic Analysis Lectures. Imperial College of Science Technology and Medicine,
London, 2001.
542
Second Edition
5.1.3.4 Foundation Design
Forces on footings and bearing capacity underneath footings should be calculated from the worst case scenario of
dead and live load combined with maximum over-turning moment and vertical earthquake component. For
simplicity, the base shear may be applied at a point 2/3 of the height of the building from the base for the
calculation of over-turning moment.
When there is no raft (mat) foundations, footings should be tied by RC beams with minimum reinforcement ratios.
The point of connection of the tie beams should not be higher than the soffit of the footing, since this creates a short
member which may be susceptible to shear failure.
5.1.3.5 Columns
Plastic hinges are allowed at the base of ground floor columns, but not at their tops. Transverse reinforcement
should be provided in the lower ¼ of the column height at a minimum spacing. This may be increased in the middle
region, but should be decreased again at the top of the column. Stirrups are all to have bending angle of 135
degrees or more, since 90 degrees stirrups are proven to be ineffective. Alternatively, the EC8 detailing
requirements should be followed.
Strictly, no hinging columns above the ground floor should be allowed. In practice though, observations have
indicated that limited hinging in a limited number of columns within a storey may be tolerated provided that a
storey sway mechanism is completely avoided. The top and bottom ¼ column heights should be adequately
confined by closed stirrups. These should be bent as above.
5.1.3.6 Member Capacity at Connections
To realize the weak beam and strong column response mode, beam capacity should be about 20%-25% lower than
the capacity of the column, taking into account a conservative estimate of the effective width of the slab. This is
one of the most important aspects of capacity design for seismic action. In this calculation, the actual areas of steel
used should be accounted for, and not the design value. Also, this calculation should not include any material
partial safety factors. Finally, for conservatism, the beam steel yield should be increased by about 10% to account
for strain hardening. In one of each four columns in a storey, this condition may be relaxed. Also, this condition
does not apply to top floor columns, where the rule can be relaxed.
The resistance mechanism in connections should be checked for the loading case with minimum gravity loads and
maximum overturning, to ascertain that there is sufficient shear resistance even when the concrete contribution is at
a minimum. The closely spaced stirrups used for column head and base should be continued into the beam-column
connection. Also, beam reinforcement should be carefully anchored, especially in exterior connections. If the
development length is sufficient, a column stub should be used to anchor the beam reinforcement.
5.1.3.7 Floor Slabs
Large openings should be avoided since the slabs are responsible for distributing the floor shear force amongst
columns and reductions in their stiffness is not conducive to favourable seismic performance due to loss of
diaphragm action.
5.1.3.8 Infill Panels
Masonry or block concrete infill panels should be protected against dislocation and shedding. Where provided, they
should not be interrupted as to form short columns in adjacent members.
543
Second Edition
5.1.3.9 Building Separation
For adjacent buildings, a minimum separation is essential. This may be calculated according to a seismic code. A
conservative approach is to calculate the elastic displacement under the design event and multiply it by the
behaviour factor used in design. The resulting displacement should not lead to pounding at any level. If the
structure in the vicinity is of drastically different dynamic characteristics, then its displacement, calculated as
above, should be added to that of the building under consideration to arrive at the required gap width. For structures
of largely similar characteristics founded on similar soils, some proportion of the sum of the two displacements
may be used. There is no global agreement on this proportion.
5.1.3.10 Architectural Elements
These are part of the structure and should be treated as such. They should either be designed to resist the forces and
especially the deformations imposed on them, or separated from the lateral load resisting system. The consequence
of their damage and shedding should be verified with regard to life safety and interruption of use.
5.1.3.11 General Robustness
All parts of the structure should be tied to ensure a monolithic response under transverse vibrations. This includes
all structural and non-structural components in the two orthogonal directions as well as the two directions one to
the other.
5.1.3.12 Detailing Requirements and Ductile Response
There is a clear definition of the inter-relation between local detailing and local and global ductility of RC
structures in EC8. For zones of low seismic exposure (say up to ground acceleration of 0.1g) ductility class L or M
(low or medium) of EC8 may be used. Requirements for ductility class H (high) may be useful only in the case of
structures where the designer requires a serious reduction in design forces, hence the use of an exceptionally high
behaviour factor q.
5.1.3.13 Eurocode 8 Conceptual Design
544
Second Edition
545
Second Edition
546
Second Edition
5.1.4 Methods of Structural Analysis
Earthquake excitations are random non-stationary functions starting from a low-level building up to a maximum
then dying away. Exact solution methods are not established. Instead, we could either analyze a set of such events
using either
I. The Equivalent Lateral Force Response Spectrum method described in Section 5.1.5 (fundamental
mode, linear, elastic analysis). This method automatically performs the seismic hazard assessment (of
Section 5.1.1.18) and evaluates the effect of the soil layers (of Section 5.1.2.15.1) culminating in the
response spectrum before the structural analysis is carried out.
II. The Multi-Modal Response Spectrum method described in Section 5.1.5 (higher modes, linear,
elastic analysis). This method automatically performs the seismic hazard assessment (of Section
5.1.1.18) and evaluates the effect of the soil layers (of Section 5.1.2.15.1) culminating in the response
spectrum before the structural analysis is carried out.
III. Performance Based Seismic Analysis and Design
(a) Multi-Modal Response Spectrum (With No Behaviour Factor) methodology described in

Section 5.1.5 and Section 5.1.10.
(b) Random (Performance Based Seismic Engineering) solution method assuming a Gaussian and
stationary (and ergodic) excitations as described in Section 4.6.4 and Section 5.1.10. This method
requires the derivation of the input power spectrum (appropriately scaled to match the soil elastic
response spectra) for the earthquake at soil level (from the seismic hazard assessment of Section
5.1.1.18 and effect of the soil layers of Section 5.1.2.15.1) to be applied onto the structure model
or alternatively the input power spectrum (appropriately scaled to match the rock elastic response
spectra) for the earthquake at rock level (from the seismic hazard assessment of Section 5.1.1.18)
to be applied onto the soil and structure model. The latter soil and structure model clearly accounts
for the soil-structure interaction (kinematic and inertial interaction) effect.
(c) Deterministic Transient Solution (Performance Based Seismic Engineering) methods based on
appropriately scaled (to match elastic response spectra) earthquake time histories and performing
linear (as described in Section 4.8 and Section 5.1.10) or nonlinear (as described in Section 4.9
and Section 5.1.10) transient dynamic analyses and then enveloping the results (higher modes,
nonlinear, inelastic analysis). This method requires the derivation of the input time histories
(appropriately scaled to match the soil elastic response spectra) for the earthquake at soil level
(from the seismic hazard assessment of Section 5.1.1.18 and effect of the soil layers of Section
5.1.2.15.1) to be applied onto the structure model or alternatively the input time histories
(appropriately scaled to match the rock elastic response spectra) for the earthquake at rock level
(from the seismic hazard assessment of Section 5.1.1.18) to be applied onto the soil and structure
model. The latter soil and structure model clearly accounts for the soil-structure interaction
(kinematic and inertial interaction) effect.
547
Second Edition
5.1.5 GL, ML Shock and Response Spectrum Analysis
5.1.5.1 Nature of the Dynamic Loading Function
(a) Random non-stationary short duration impulse loading functions
Deterministic loadings can be readily solved in the frequency or time domain using forced frequency and forced
transient response analyses. Random loadings, which are stationary and ergodic, can be solved in the frequency
domain using random vibration analysis. If the forcing function is a random non-stationary forcing function such
that the random forces start from a low-level building up to a maximum then dying away, such as in a seismic
event, then exact solution methods are not established. Instead, we could either analyze a set of such events using
deterministic transient solution methods and then average or envelope the results or alternatively use the response
or shock spectrum method which envelopes the response spectra of a series of time histories. The latter method,
although computationally cheaper, ignores phase information of the signals. Response spectrum computes the
relative response with respect to the base whilst shock spectrum computes the absolute response.
5.1.5.2 The Response Spectra
Response spectrum analysis is an approximate method of computing the peak response of a transient excitation
applied to as simple structure or component. If is often used for earthquake excitations and also to predict peak
response of equipment in spacecraft that is subjected to impulsive load due to stage separation.
A response spectrum is a curve of the maximum response (displacement, velocity, acceleration etc.) of a series of
single DOF systems of different natural frequencies and damping to a given acceleration time history. It
548
Second Edition
characterizes the acceleration time history and has nothing to do with the properties of the structure. Any
acceleration time series can be converted into a response spectrum. The response spectrum at rock level is
obviously different from that on the soil surface because the acceleration time series would have been modified by
the flexibility of the soil. Hence, the response spectrum is generated at the level where the structure stands.
However, in doing so it becomes apparent that the characteristics of the soil no longer play any part in the dynamic
response of the structure, i.e. there is no soil-structure interaction.
The response spectrum gives the maximum response for a series of SDOF systems characterized by their natural
frequencies and damping. To establish a response spectrum, the dynamic equations of motion are solved for each
and every SDOF system using Duhamel’s integral for linear systems. Step-by-step linear acceleration method
(explicit scheme since there is only one DOF) for nonlinear systems cannot really be employed, as superposition of
nonlinear modal responses is not strictly valid for nonlinear systems where the physical coordinates (which
includes all modes together) responds nonlinearly. One equation is solved for each SDOF system and the maximum
value plots one point on the response spectra.
When analyzing the dynamic response of a structure founded on rock, the input motion due to an earthquake is the
same with or without the structure. Calculations assuming a fixed base structure should therefore give realistic
results. However, when analyzing a structure founded on a soil site due to the same earthquake there are changes in
motion at foundation level leading to changes in dynamic response of the structure. These changes are all effects of
dynamic soil structure interaction. The structure will interact with the soil in two ways. Firstly, structural inertial
loads are transferred back into the soil and secondly, the stiffer structural foundations are not able to conform to the
generally non-uniform motion of the free-field surface. These effects are known respectively as inertial and
kinematic interaction. To account for soil-structure interaction, other methods such as random solutions or
deterministic transient solutions with both the soil and structure explicitly modeled must be employed.
Once the response spectrum has been established, the response of a structure can be established depending on
whether the idealization is SDOF (equivalent lateral force method) or MDOF (multi-modal spectrum analysis).
5.1.5.2.1 Ball Park Figures
Wind loading base shear, Vwind = 0.01 – 0.03 WTOTAL

Earthquake elastic base shear, Velastic = Se(g)(T1) WTOTAL = 0.25 – 0.30 WTOTAL in high seismicity areas
Earthquake inelastic base shear, Vinelastic = Sd(g)(T1) WTOTAL = 0.15 – 0.20 WTOTAL in high seismicity areas
= 0.05 – 0.07 WTOTAL in low seismicity areas
Peak ground acceleration, PGA = 0.40g in high seismicity areas
= 0.07g in low seismicity areas
Spectrum amplification, M = 2.5
Se
M
T
Behaviour factor, q = 2 for very non-ductile structures
= 8.5 for very ductile structures
5.1.5.2.2 Low Period Structures
As RC structures crack with earthquake impact, T increases. Hence the spectrum is modified as follows.
Acceleration
Acceleration
Spectral
Spectral
T T
549
Second Edition
5.1.5.2.3 Behaviour Factors (Force Reduction Factors) for Inelastic Design
It is not feasible, practical or economical to design elastically. The accelerations obtained from elastic loading Pe =
Se(g)(T)W could cause great nonstructural damage and endanger lives as Se(T) >> Sd(T). The concept is to use the
ductility of the structure to absorb energy by designing for Pd < Pe. Concepts of energy absorption in the inelastic
range are used to reduce the elastic forces by as much as 80 – 85%. Hence the force reduction factor (aka response
modification factor or behaviour factor) is
Se
Behaviour factor, q =
Sd
The relationships between elastic and inelastic forces for different periods are
P P P
Pe=Pd Pe Pe
µ=δu/δy>δe/δy µ=δu/δy=δe/δy
Pd Pd
δ δ δ
δe=δu δy δe δu δy δe=δu
Equal Acceleration Equal Energy Equal Displacement
Very Short Period Short Period Long Period

T < 0.2s 0.2s < T < 0.5s T > 0.5s
Pd = Pe Pe Pe
Pd = Pd =
q = 1.0 2µ − 1 µ
q = 2µ − 1 q=µ
Hence, the behaviour factor depends on the period of the structure and to a lesser extent the period of maximum
amplification in the earthquake spectrum. The force reduction factor q increases as T increases. The aspects that
contribute to the value of q are
I. Ductility i.e. inelastic energy absorption through damage, which is equivalent to having higher
damping (accounted for)
II. The ability of the structure to redistribute the action effects upon softening of a particular zone
(accounted for)
III. Loss of energy through radiation damping in the soil semi infinite half space (not accounted for)
IV. Effect of uplift on cutting off the input of earthquake energy (not accounted for)
The response modification (reduction) behaviour factor q is generally on the conservative side for the force
calculations, but may be on the unconservative side for displacements. Hence, for the assessment of displacement,
the linear elastic displacements under the design forces are multiplied (increased) by q to arrive to an
approximate inelastic displacement.
550
Second Edition
5.1.5.2.4 UBC 1997 Elastic and Inelastic Response Spectrum
The UBC elastic spectrum is defined by three lines governing low period response, mid period response and high
period response.
Depending on where the mode period T lands the base spectral acceleration Sa(g)(T) is defined by
where T0 and T1 depend on the soil.
The seismic coefficients Ca and Cv are dependent upon seismicity level and soil conditions at the site as follows.
Na and Nu are near-source factors for Seismic Zone 4. Their values are in the range of 1.0 to 2.0 as follows.
551
Second Edition
The zone factor Z represents the effective peak ground acceleration expected in the region and is in units of g.
These values are obtained from seismic hazard analysis (as according to Section 5.1.1.18) culminating in the
seismic zone map. The values reflect a 90% probability of not being exceeded in 50 years, which corresponds to a
return period of 475 years. In the UBC, the US is divided into 5 seismic zones, namely, zones 1, 2A, 2B, 3, and 4.
To account for the amplification effects introduced by different local soil conditions, the UBC distinguishes six
different soil profile types as summarized as follows.
In the absence of detailed information, one may assume type SD. Type SE or SF need not be considered unless it is
substantiated by geotechnical investigations.
The elastic spectrum can be converted into the inelastic spectrum by dividing by the ductility response modification
factor, R. The structural factor R reflects the global ductility of the lateral load resistance system of the structure.
The more ductile the structural system is, the lower can be the resistance of the structure and therefore, the larger
can be the value of R.
552
Second Edition
Criteria for Design
The 1.4 x inelastic response spectrum is used for ultimate state plastic capacity design.
To account for accidental torsional loads, where floor diagrams are not flexible, the UBC requires that the force Fi
at each level be applied at a point that is away from the calculated center of mass by a distance that is 5% of the
building dimension at that level perpendicular to the direction of Fi.
where k = 5%.
The UBC limits the story drift in a structure. The story drift, ∆ is the relative displacement between two adjacent
levels of a structure.
The drift ∆S is determined with the inelastic response spectrum. The maximum inelastic drift ∆M is then computed
For structures with T < 0.7 seconds,
For structures with T > 0.7 seconds,
where H is the storey height.
553
Second Edition
5.1.5.2.5 EC8 Elastic and Inelastic Response Spectrum
The elastic Se(g)(T) and inelastic spectrum Sd(g)(T) are defined in four parts as follows. The response spectrum is
defined for 10% probability of occurrence in 50 years, or a return period of 475 years. The following depicts the
horizontal response spectrum. Note that these response spectra are normalized by g.
SA (T) αSηβ0
αSηβ0/q 1.0
αS 2/3
2.0
5/3
T (s)
TB TC TD
where the damping correction factor η with reference value η = 1 for 5% viscous damping is
Note that α (or ag) is the peak ground acceleration in g, S is the soil response parameter, β0 is the spectral
amplification factor for 5% damping, TB and TC are the limits of the constant acceleration region, TD is the limit of
the constant displacement region and k1 and k2 are the spectrum shape exponents.
The vertical response spectrum is obtained by scaling the horizontal response spectrum as follows.
Note that the peak ground acceleration α (or ag) is the acceleration at bedrock level. This will be modified by
the soil as depicted by the fact that at T = 0, the soil ground acceleration is αS. The soil would also affect the
response spectrum for other values of T. The codified response spectra then represent the excitation signal at the
soil level, and not at the bedrock level. A public domain database of the peak ground acceleration worldwide is
maintained at GSHAP (http://www.seismo.ethz.ch/GSHAP/global/).
The soil class determined parameters are as follows.
554
Second Edition
Corresponding values of k1 and k2 for the elastic spectra are 1.0 and 2.0 for all subsoil classes. The subsoil classes
are defined as follows.
When the subsoil profile includes an alluvial surface layer with thickness varying between 5 and 20 m, underlain
by much stiffer materials of class A, the spectrum shape for subsoil class B can be used together with an increased
soil parameter S equal to 1.4, unless a special study is performed.
Special attention should be paid in the case of a deposit of subsoil class C which consists — or contains a layer at
least 10 m thick — of soft clays/silts with high plasticity index (PI > 40) and high water content. Such soils
typically have very low values of vs, low internal damping and an abnormally extended range of linear behaviour
and can therefore produce anomalous seismic site amplification and soil-structure interaction effects; In this case, a
special study for the definition of the seismic action should be carried out, in order to establish the dependence of
the response spectrum on the thickness and vs-value of the soft clay/silt layer and on the stiffness contrast between
this layer and the underlying materials.
Typically, the behaviour factor q is unity for elastic response and may be up to 5 for RC structures and 6 for steel
structures. This may be contrasted with values of Rw but after dividing by 1.4 (i.e. Rw maximum is 12/1.4 = 8.5 and
minimum 4/1.4 = 2.8) in recognition of the different philosophies consistent with the behaviour factor used. Note
that when q is greater than about 2.5, the inelastic spectrum dips below the zero period value (ground acceleration).
Of course, the greater the value of q, the lower the base shear.
For concrete structures, q = q0kDkRkW.
555
Second Edition
For steel structures q is given by the follows.
556
Second Edition
For timber structures, the behaviour factor is listed
557
Second Edition
558
Second Edition
For masonry structures, the behaviour factor is listed.
For irregular buildings (in whatever material) q is further reduced by 20% from that listed above.
The only difference between the elastic and the inelastic spectrum is the behaviour factor q and the values of k1 and
k2. To be more precise, the spectral amplification β0 is divided by q in the inelastic spectrum.
559
Second Edition
EC8 requires the dynamic mass calculated (i.e. divide the gravitational force by g to get mass) for the determination
of the periods of the structure and the mass being acceleration by the ground motion (the greater the mass, the
greater the base shear) from
100% DL + ϕψ2i LL
where ϕ is obtained from
The peak ground displacement may be estimated from
The structural displacements can be determined from
where q is the behaviour factor, de the displacement response and γ the importance factor.
The importance factors are presented.
560
Second Edition
Criteria for Design
Seismic zones with a design ground acceleration α (i.e. peak ground acceleration in g) not greater than 0.10g are
low seismicity zones, for which reduced or simplified seismic design procedures for certain types or categories of
structures may be used. In seismic zones with a design ground acceleration α not greater than 0.04g the provisions
of Eurocode 8 need not be observed.
EC8 seismic load combinations cases are
1.0 DL + ψ2i LL ± γ 1.0 EQX

1.0 DL + ψ2i LL ± γ 1.0 EQY
1.0 DL + ψ2i LL ± γ 1.0 (EQX2 + EQY2)½
1.0 DL + ψ2i LL ± γ 1.0 EQX ± γ 0.3 EQY ± γ 0.3 EQZ
where ψ2i is obtained from the following table.
EQ refers to the inelastic response spectrum. The enveloped results are employed to design the elements to its
ultimate state plastic capacity.
The EC8 limits the story drift in a structure. The inelastic displacement drift is obtained by multiplying the drift
obtained from using the inelastic response spectrum by the behaviour factor. This value should not exceed 0.4% of
the height of the story, H.
∆ d = q.∆ e < 0.004H ν
561
Second Edition
where the reduction factor ν (accounting for the lower return period of the seismic event associated with the
serviceability limit state) is
Second order effects (P-∆ effects) need not be considered if the following condition is met for all storeys.
If 0.1 < θ < 0.2, then P-∆ effects can be accounted for approximately by increasing seismic actions by 1/(1-θ). The
value of θ shall not exceed 0.3.
562
Second Edition
5.1.5.2.6 IBC 2000 Elastic and Inelastic Response Spectrum
The IBC spectrum is defined by three lines governing low period response, mid period response and high period
response. The response spectrum Sa(g)(T) is defined
where
where the design spectral response acceleration parameters
and where the maximum elastic spectra are
where SS and S1 are the short period acceleration response parameter and the 1s period acceleration response
parameter and the coefficients Fa and Fv which are dependent upon the site class and SS/S1 are defined
The short period force reduction should normally be ignored in response spectrum calculations.
563
Second Edition
5.1.5.2.7 FEMA 356 Elastic and Inelastic Response Spectrum
The FEMA 356 spectrum is defined by three lines governing low period response, mid period response and high
period response. The response spectrum Sa(g)(T) is defined
where
where
where SS and S1 are the short period acceleration response parameter and the 1s period acceleration response
parameter and the coefficients Fa and Fv which are dependent upon the site class and SS/S1 are defined
Site class D is default. The values for BS and B1 are a function of the effective viscous damping (β). Default value
for β is 5%.
The vertical response is 2/3 of the above response spectrum.
564
Second Edition
5.1.5.3 GL, ML SDOF Response Spectrum Analysis – Equivalent Lateral Static Force Method
The equivalent lateral force method is a special case of the multi-modal approach, i.e. by only including the
fundamental mode. A SDOF system subject to base excitations, in relative terms has the following ODE.
m&
u&r ( t ) + cu&r ( t ) + ku r ( t ) = − m&
u&s ( t )
The response will be obtained in relative terms as follows from Duhamel’s (Convolution) Integral.
1 τ= t
u r (τ = t ) = ∫ p(τ)e − ξωn ( t − τ) sin ω d ( t − τ)dτ
mω d τ= 0
1 τ= t
= ∫ u&s (τ)e −ξωn ( t − τ) sin ω d ( t − τ)dτ
− m&
mω d τ= 0
1 τ= t
=
ωd ∫τ =0
u&s (τ)e −ξωn ( t − τ ) sin ω d ( t − τ)dτ
−&
τ= t
MAX  u&s (τ)e −ξωn ( t − τ) sin ω d ( t − τ)dτ
1
u r max (τ = t ) =
ωd  ∫τ=0
&

1
= Sv where S v = pseudo spectral velocity
ωd
Because of the irregularity of the excitation function, the Duhamel’s Integral will have to be solved numerically.
The plot of the maximum dynamic displacement response urmax for various natural periods Ti is known as the
spectral displacement (or the displacement response spectrum), SD. The spectral velocity (or the velocity response
spectrum) is SV and the spectral acceleration is SA. These are related approximately as follows.
S
S V = ω n ,d S D = A
ω n ,d
It is a mere coincidence that these relationships are same as that between acceleration, velocity and displacement in
simple harmonic motion. The derivation of the response spectrum enables the response prediction of SDOF
systems. For a SDOF system, the maximum dynamic force (i.e. the base shear) on the SDOF mass is then
SV S
Max dynamicforce = ku rmax = k = mω 2n V
ωd ωd
≈ mω n S V
W
≈ SA
g
≈ WSA (g)
If the structure is idealized as a SDOF system characterized by its first fundamental frequency or period T1, the
response is computed as follows
(i) The fundamental period T1 of the structure corresponding to the horizontal first mode is established
(ii) The response is computed in g ms-2 from the response spectrum SA(g)(T1)
(iii) The base shear is computed as Fbase shear = SA(g)(T1)W
(iv) The base shear is distributed linearly along the height of the structure and a static analysis
performed; this effectively determines the equivalent dynamic response
Note that in the equation for base shear V = SA(g)W, the acceleration spectrum SA(g) is in terms of g. Also, W is
the modal weight, i.e. the modal mass times g. Here in the equivalent static force method, we only consider the
fundamental period. Noting for most structures, the fundamental modal weight W1 is some 80-90% of the total
565
Second Edition
weight, if the spectral ordinates SA1 is larger or equal to SA2, SA3 etc …, then replacing W1 by WT will always yield
an upper bound on V.
SA(g) SA(g)
S1A(g) S2B(g)
S2A(g)
S2A(g)
T T
T2A T1A T2B T1B
Since S1A is multiplied by W1, which is normally much larger than W2, W3 etc …, then multiplying S1A by WT will
yield an upper bound on the total force. This is clearly not the case for system B.
The equivalent lateral static force method is very crude since it does not consider higher (than the fundamental)
modes of vibration, and hence is not really a dynamic analysis. Higher modes may be significant especially at the
local level even if they do not contribute much to the base shear. This is simply because higher modes have shapes
which are fundamentally different from that of the fundamental mode cause localized higher forces. Higher modes
can be addressed by performing the multi-modal method.
We have said that the base shear is V = WTSA(g). Codes of practice generally provide methods of calculating this
expression. This expression then of course account for the fundamental mode only, but the response spectra derived
from codes of practice can be used for the multi-modal spectrum analysis. Now, for this fundamental mode
approach (equivalent lateral load), codes of practice state V = SA(g)WT. Typically SA(g) depends on
I. Period dependent coefficient representing the shape of the spectrum

II. Importance factor representing the probability of the design load being exceeded
III. Zone factor representing the seismic hazard at the site
IV. Site response parameter representing the amplification characteristic of the soil
V. Response modification factor representing the ability of the structure to dissipate energy
566
Second Edition
5.1.5.3.1 UBC 1997
For Seismic Zones 3 and 4, the static load procedure is only applicable to regular structures under 240 ft. in height
or irregular structures not more than five stories or 65 ft. in height. The equivalent lateral force
< <
W is the total weight of the structure. The UBC further requires that for Seismic Zone 4,
I is the structural importance factor.
The base shear is distributed based on
which is based on the assumption that the fundamental mode of the structure has a linear shape. Ft is the top storey
force to account for higher mode effects. The force at each level is proportional to the height and story weight.
Clearly, the total base shear is
In general, higher-mode effects are only important for structures that have relatively long fundamental periods.
Hence, in the UBC, Ft is zero when T < 0.7 seconds and it increases in proportion to T up to 0.25V, i.e.
567
Second Edition
The fundamental period T can be obtained using the empirical formula where hN is the height of the building in feet
as follows
Alternatively, it can be obtained using modal analysis or Rayleigh’s formula
T1 = 2π
1 ∑W δ
i
2
i
g ∑W δ
i i
Although the latter method is more rational, the UBC requires that the value of T obtained with the modal analysis
or Rayleigh’s method be no greater than that obtained with the empirical by more than 30% for Seismic Zone 4 and
40% for Seismic Zones 1, 2, and 3.
5.1.5.3.2 EC8
Base shear, Fb = Sd(T1).W
Fundamental period of vibration, T1 = CtH0.75. Alternatively, it can be obtained using modal analysis or Rayleigh’s
formula
T1 = 2π
1 ∑W δ
i
2
i
g ∑W δ
i i
The base shear is assumed linearly distributed along the height of the building, hence the seismic forces at level i
are given by Fi where zi is the height of the storey from the ground.
z .W
Fi = Fb . i i
∑ z j .W j
5.1.5.3.3 IBC 2000
The base shear is
where
568
Second Edition
< <
For buildings in Seismic Design Category E or F where S1 > 0.6g, Cs must be greater than
The fundamental period of the structure is calculated as
where the factor CT depends on the type of building frame and hN is the height of the building in feet. Alternatively
the fundamental period of the building can be calculated from a modal analysis, but cannot exceed
where Cu is a function of SD1 (the design response acceleration at 1 second period).
The vertical force is distributed as follows.
where
where the exponent k depends on the building period from 1 for buildings with a short period to 2 for buildings
with a long period. Fx is the force applied at each storey, this is then distributed across the nodes on the storey in
proportion to the nodal masses.
5.1.5.3.4 FEMA 356
The base shear is given by
The fundamental period is calculated from
The factors CT and β depend on the type of building frame and h is the height of the building in feet. Alternatively,
the fundamental period can be calculated from modal analysis.
The vertical distribution of forces is given by
where
where the exponent k depends on the building period from 1 for buildings with a short period to 2 for buildings
with a long period. Fx is the force applied at each storey, this is then distributed across the nodes on the storey in
proportion to the nodal masses.
569
Second Edition
5.1.5.4 GL, ML MDOF Response Spectrum Analysis – Multi-Modal Seismic Analysis
For a MDOF system, the equation of motion for support excitation in relative terms is
[M ]{&
u&( t )} + [C]{u&( t )} + [K ]{u ( t )} = −[M ]{1}&
u&s ( t )
Note that {D} = {1} is a unity vector corresponding to the rigid body motion. The support excitation causes all the
masses to produce an inertial force opposing its motion (D’Alembert’s Principle).
Let {u ( t )} = [Φ ]{ξ( t )}
{ }
[M ][Φ ] & { }
ξ&( t ) + [C][Φ ] ξ&( t ) + [K ][Φ ]{ξ( t )} = −[M ]{1}&
u&s ( t )
Premultiplying by [Φ ] reduces the coupled system of ODEs to a system of uncoupled ODEs

T
[Φ ]T [M ][Φ] & { } T
{ }
ξ&( t ) + [Φ ] [C][Φ ] ξ&( t ) + [Φ ] [K ][Φ ]{ξ( t )} = −[Φ ] [M ]{1}&
T T
u& ( t ) s
[M]{&
ξ&( t )}+ [C]{ξ&( t )}+ [K ]{ξ( t )} = −[Φ ] [M ]{1}&
u& ( t )
T
s
Each uncoupled equation being

M i& u&s ( t )
T
Dividing the equation of motion for the ith natural mode from above by its modal mass gives

Mi & u&s ( t )
T
2ξ M ω − {φ i } [M ]{1}&
u&s ( t )
T
& K
ξ&i ( t ) + i i ni ξ&i ( t ) + i ξ i ( t ) =
Mi Mi Mi
&& &
ξ ( t ) + 2ξ ω ξ ( t ) + ω ξ ( t ) = Γ &
2
u& ( t )
i i ni i ni i i s
where the ith mode participation factor is defined as
{φ i }T [M ]{1} {φ i }T [M ]{1}
Γi = − =−
Mi {φ i }T [M ]{φ i }
Bereft of the modal participation factor, the equations of motion reduce to simple SDOF systems characterized by
only the natural frequency and damping and subject to the excitation & u&s ( t ) . Duhamel’s Integral is used to evaluate
numerically to derive the response spectra to &u&s ( t ) . That is to say, for
&
q&i ( t ) + 2ξ i ω ni q&i ( t ) + ω 2ni q i ( t ) = &
u&s ( t )
the response is
1 τ= t
q r (τ = t ) = ∫ p(τ)e −ξωn ( t − τ) sin ω d ( t − τ)dτ
mω d τ =0
1 τ= t
=
mω d ∫τ =0
u&s (τ)e −ξωn ( t − τ) sin ω d ( t − τ)dτ
− m&
1 τ= t
=
ωd ∫
τ= 0
u&s (τ)e − ξωn ( t − τ) sin ω d ( t − τ)dτ
−&
τ= t
MAX  u&s (τ)e − ξωn ( t − τ ) sin ω d ( t − τ)dτ
1
q r max (τ = t ) =
ωd  τ =0
& ∫ 
1
= Sv where S v = pseudo spectral velocity
ωd
570
Second Edition
The plot of the maximum dynamic displacement response for various natural periods Ti is known as the spectral
displacement (or the displacement response spectrum), SD i.e. qrmax. The spectral velocity (or the velocity response
spectrum) is SV and the spectral acceleration is SA. These are related approximately as follows.
S
S V = ω n ,d S D = A
ω n ,d
It is a mere coincidence that these relationships are same as that between acceleration, velocity and displacement in
simple harmonic motion. The maximum modal responses are then
ξ i max ( t ) = Γi S D
ξ& ( t ) = Γ S
i max i V
&
ξ&i max ( t ) = Γi S A
Once the individual maximum modal responses are computed, the maximum physical responses is calculated from
the following based on some method of superposition.
{u rmax (t)} = [Φ ]{ξ max ( t )}

{u& (t)} = [Φ ]{ξ& ( t )}
rmax max
u&rmax (t)} = [Φ ]{&

{& ξ&max ( t )}
Thus, if the structure is idealized as a MDOF system characterized by its first few frequencies or period T1, the
response spectrum analysis method is performed as follows.
(i) The response spectrum is first established from the forcing acceleration time history. The
acceleration response of a notional mode (of a particular natural frequency) is established
separately from solving the equation of motion bereft of the modal participation factor
&
q&i ( t ) + 2ξ i ω ni q&i ( t ) + ω 2ni q i ( t ) = &
u&s ( t )
resulting in the solution for each notional mode (each natural frequency) in the time domain by
Duhamel’s Integral
1 τ= t
q r (τ = t ) =
ω d τ=0
−& ∫
u&s ( τ)e − ξωn ( t − τ ) sin ω d ( t − τ)dτ
the maximum of which is found for each notional mode (each natural frequency) to define the
(maximum) response spectra
τ= t
MAX  u&s ( τ)e −ξωn ( t − τ ) sin ω d ( t − τ)dτ
1
S D = q r max ( τ = t ) =
ωd  τ=0
& ∫ 
SA
S V = ω n ,d S D =
ω n ,d
(ii) The modal (or generalized) mass Mi is computed for each mode i as follows
Mi = {φi}T[M]{φi}
The actual magnitudes of the modal masses in itself are incomplete to describe the importance of
the mode (as the amplitude of the modal force must also be considered) as they depend on the
method of eigenvector normalization
571
Second Edition
(iii) The amplitude of the modal force is for each mode i
Li = {φi}T[M]{1}
where the vector {D} = {1} simply represents the vector of rigid body motion.
(iv) And the modal participation factor and effective mass for each mode i is defined as
Modal participation factor, Γi = Li / Mi
Modal effective mass, EffectiveMassi = Li2 / Mi
both representing the relative contribution of each mode (excluding the frequency content of the
excitation function which is encapsulated in the response spectrum) to the response prior to
multiplication by the input function. The fundamental mode shape will usually have a dominant
participation factor and effective mass associated with it. Higher modes will have a lower
participation because the positive and negative components of the mode shape in the participation
expression cancels out. This generally does not occur in load excitations unless the loading is
uniformly distributed, such as is the case in enforced motion. Sufficient modes must be included
such that ∑Li2/Mi is at least 90% of the total mass. Participation factor and modal effective mass is
calculated in NASTRAN using the Case Control Command MEFFMASS.
(v) The maximum modal response in modal space for mode i is computed as follows
ξ& ( t ) = Γ S
i max i V
&
(vi) The maximum modal responses in physical space for mode i is then computed as follows
{u imax (t)} = {φ i }ξ i max ( t ) = {φ i }Γi S D

{u& (t)} = {φ }ξ& ( t ) = {φ }Γ S
imax i i max i i V
u&imax (t)} = {φ i }&

{& ξ&i max ( t ) = {φ i }Γi S A
(vii) The (dynamic) base shear for a particular mode i is
Vi = EffectiveMass i SA
=
[{φ } [M]{1}] S
i
T 2
{φi }T [M]{φi } A
If SA is expressed as a fraction of g, then the modal base shear is
Vi = EffectiveWeight i S A (g )
=
[{φ } [W]{1}] S
i
T 2
A (g )
{φi }T [W ]{φi }
Hence, for a simple building of floors denoted by m, the modal base shear for mode i is
2
 m=all 

 ∑ w m φ mi 
Wi =  mm==1all  S (g )
A
∑
m =1
w m φ 2mi
572
Second Edition
(viii) Finally the modal force response (i.e. force at every DOF) for mode i is computed as follows
{Fi } = [M]{& u&i (t)}

= [M ]{φ i }Γi S A
{φ }T [M ]{1} S
= [M ]{φ i } i T
{φi } [M]{φi } A
[M ]{φ i } [{φ i } [M ]{1}]
T 2
= S
{φi }T [M]{1} {φi }T [M]{φi } A
=
[M]{φi } V
{φi }T [M]{1} i
The above can also be expressed in weight ratios as
{Fi } = [WT ]{φi } Vi

{φ i } [W ]{1}
Hence, for a simple building of floors denoted by m, the force at floor m due to mode i is
M m φ mi w m φ mi
f mi = Vi m =all
= Vi m = all
∑M
m =1
m φ mi ∑w
m =1
m φ mi
(ix) The modal responses are then combined using the SRSS or the CQC combinations. The upper
bound responses of the different modes can be established using the SRSS method if the modal
frequencies are well separated. Alternatively, the complete quadratic combination (CQC) method
should be used if some modal frequencies are closely spaced, in which case the absolute sum of the
response of these closely spaced modes is taken on the assumption that they can peak in phase with
each other. These combinations can be used for any modal response, be it the displacement,
velocity, acceleration, modal force responses or modal base shears.
n
SRSS : V = ∑V
i =1
i
2
n n ( ) (ζ
8 ζiζ j
1/ 2
)
+ rζ j r1.5
∑∑
i
CQC : V = Vi β ij Vj βij =
i =1 j=1 (1 − r )
2 2
( ) ( )
+ 4ζ i ζ j r 1 + r 2 + 4 ζ i2 + ζ 2j r 2
The cross-modal parameters βij are a function of the duration and frequency content of the
earthquake record, and frequencies and damping characteristics of the structure. For an earthquake
duration much longer than the periods of the structure and a response spectrum which is not
exceptionally spiky and constant modal damping, the cross-modal parameters are given by
8ζ 2 (1 + r )r1.5
βij =
(1 − r )
2 2
+ 4ζ 2 r(1 + r )
2
where ζ is the damping ratio and r is the period ratio (Ti/Tj). Indeed, the use of CQC is
recommended in general, but the difference between the two methods diminishes rapidly as the
mode spacing increases.
573
Second Edition
The assumptions and limitations of a multi-modal response spectrum analysis are as follows: -
(i) The response spectrum method only provides the maximum values of response.
(ii) The analysis is geometrically and materially linear and the nonlinearity is very crudely
incorporated into the analysis using the q-factor (Europe) to reduce the amplitudes of the elastic
response spectra to an inelastic response spectra. Higher modes are accounted for, i.e. the inter-
storey forces generated due to higher modes are taken into account by computing the modal
displacement responses and converting that to the modal force responses. These are then applied as
static forces in a linear static analysis. We can say that the dynamic effects of higher modes are
effectively taken into account, however only if the response is linear and elastic. An alternative
would be to perform nonlinear time domain analyses of appropriately scaled (to match response
spectra) seismic time histories and envelope the results.
(iii) Since the response spectrum is the maximum response of a series of SDOF systems, it must be
remembered that the peak response for one SDOF system does not occur at the same time as the
peak response for another. In other words there is no phase information between the responses
of the individual modes or SDOF systems. Hence, various methods to combine these peak
responses are employed such as the SRSS (Square Root of the Sum of the Squares), the ABS
(absolute values) the NRL (U.S. Navy Shock Design Modal Summation) or the CQC (complete
quadratic combination). Thus, the results of a response spectrum analysis are not a set of results in
equilibrium but the maximum values that can be expected.
(iv) There is also no consideration of phase of the response with respect to the loading as only the
magnitude is computed.
(v) Another restriction of the response spectrum method is that it is only valid if all support motion
in a given direction is identical. This is usually valid for ground movements applied to buildings
or local floor movements applied to equipment but it is not applicable to piping systems where the
anchor points of the pipe are connected to different structures or even different parts of the same
structure 9. Another case would be a long span suspension bridge where the earthquake excitations
may differ on either side of the abutment.
(vi) It is assumed that each oscillator mass is very small relative to the base structural mass so that the
oscillator does not influence the dynamic behavior of the base structure, i.e. no soil-structure
interaction accounted for in the earthquake vibration analysis.
If base isolation is employed, the stiffness of the base isolator can be incorporated into the finite element model,
hence elongating the periods. Base isolation in effect simply introduces a low frequency component into the
system. The periods will be elongated and the corresponding response spectra value will be lower. Base isolation is
thus used for stiff structures in order to elongate the effective period of the system.
9
574
Second Edition
5.1.5.4.1 UBC 1997
The design base shear determined from the multi modal response shall not be less than 90% of that determined by
the equivalent static load procedure for regular structures and 100% for irregular structures. Hence there is a
requirement for a scale factor for the force as follows
Vequivalent static 1
Force scale factor = α T but Force scale factor >
Vmulti − mod al R
where αT is 0.9 for regular structures or 1.0 for irregular structures. Likewise the scale factor for displacements
Vequivalent static
Displacement scale factor = α T
Vmulti − mod al
5.1.5.4.2 EC8
No additional specific requirements.
5.1.5.4.3 IBC 2000
5.1.5.4.4 FEMA 356
575
Second Edition
5.1.5.5 Example Application EC8
Following a seismic hazard of Section 5.1.1.18 and the soil response analyses of Section 5.1.2.15.1, a peak ground
acceleration at the bedrock level of 0.6g and at the soil level of 0.15g has been obtained. The results of these two
initial steps culminate in the response spectra. The 0.15g acceleration corresponds to the value of the response
spectrum at period, T = 0.0s. The soil analysis will also produce ordinates of the response spectrum for other values
of the period, T. With this, the seismic action effects on the structure are determined based on the simplified
equivalent lateral force analysis and the multi-modal response spectrum analyses. The level of member detailing
corresponds to ductility class “M” and the site soil conditions are such that soil class “B” is appropriate. The
regularity of the structure in plan enables the analysis to be based on a typical frame as shown below. The floor
slabs are assumed to be infinitely rigid (i.e. no large openings etc.) in order to distribute the floor shear forces
amongst the columns in diaphragm action.
3m
3m
3m
6m 6m 6m 6m
5.1.5.5.1 Structural Loading
Assume a concrete volumetric weight of 25 kN/m3.
Loads on Slabs
Self-weight of slab + partitions, G = 6 kN/m2

Live load, Q = 3 kN/m2
Loads on Beams
Dead load on beam, Gk = self-weight + slab dead load x width = 0.3 x 0.5 x 25 + 6 x 5 = 33.75 kN/m
Live load on beam, Qk = slab live load x width = 3 x 5 = 15 kN/m
5.1.5.5.2 Seismic Forces Using the Simplified Equivalent Lateral Force Analysis of EC8
Fundamental Period of Vibration Using Simplified Method
Fundamental period of vibration, T1 = CtH0.75 = 0.075 x H0.75 = 0.075 x 90.75 = 0.39s
Fundamental Period of Vibration Using Rayleigh’s Method
Seismic self weight on storey 3: Gk + ΨE Qk = 33.75 x 24 + 0.3 x (15 x 24) = 918 kN (no column)
Seismic self weight on storey 2: Gk + ΨE Qk = 918 + 5 x 0.4 x 0.5 x 3 x 25 = 993 kN
Seismic self weight on storey 1: Gk + ΨE Qk = 993 kN
A structural static analysis programme was used to give the displacement of the structure under the seismic weight
as shown in below.
576
Second Edition
Cross-sectional
Beam Column
Properties
Area bd = 30 x 50 = 1500 cm2 bd = 50 x 40 = 2000 cm2
Second moment of 1/12bd3 = 1/12 x 30 x 503 = 1/12bd3 = 1/12 x 40 x 503 =

area about major axis 312500 cm4 416667 cm4
Second moment of 1/12db3 = 1/12 x 50 x 303 = 1/12db3 = 1/12 x 50 x 403 =

area about minor axis 112500 cm4 266667 cm4
0.070m
918 kN
0.053m
993 kN
0.024m
993 kN
6m 6m 6m 6m
T1 = 2π
1 ∑W δ 2
i i
= 2π
1  918x 0.070 2 + 993x 0.053 2 + 993x 0.024 2


 = 0.47s
g ∑W δ i i
9.81  918x 0.070 + 993x 0.053 + 993x 0.024 

The fundamental period of the structure calculated from both the simplified method and Rayleigh’s method are
very similar. This is because the structure is uniform and regular. The low period also signifies a relatively stiff
structure, which is why the simplified method provided an accurate estimate.
Behaviour Factor
The behaviour factor represents the ability of the structure to respond in a ductile manner. Higher values of q
require greater level of detailing for ductility. However, the greater energy absorbing capacity provided by the
greater ductility enables the structure to be designed for lower seismic action forces. The behaviour factor q reduces
as T increases, but dependence on the period is not explicitly considered. Also, over-strength and redundancy
parameters are not taken into account either.
Behaviour factor, q = q0 kD kR kW
where basic behaviour factor, q0 = 5.0 as this is a RC frame system
kD = 0.75 as this is a ductility class “M” structure
kR = 1.0 as this is a regular structure
kW = 1.0 as this is a frame system
Hence, q = 5 x 0.75 x 1 x 1 = 3.75
577
Second Edition
Inelastic Spectral Acceleration of EC8
From previous soil response analysis of Section 5.1.2.15.1,
(i) the soil at the site is characterized by shear wave velocities of 200 to 250 m/s at depths of 10m and
450 to 500 at depths of 50m. This signifies Soil Class “B”. Hence, S = 1.0, β0 = 2.5, TB = 0.15 and
TC = 0.6.
(ii) design ground acceleration in terms of g, α = 0.15
Also, because the structure is of reinforced concrete, the critical viscous damping ζ is 5%. Hence, η = (7/(2+ζ))0.5 =
1. The linear elastic response spectrum is reduced by the behaviour factor q in order to force the structure to resist
the seismic actions in the inelastic range. This allows for the design based on lower seismic design forces..
Elastic and Design Spectra of EC8

TB TC TD
0.4
0.35
0.3
0.25
Se
0.2
0.15 Sd
0.1
0.05
0
0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 4 4.5
Period T (s)
β0
Spectral acceleration, Sd (T1 ) = α.S.η. , TB ≤ T1 ≤ TC
q
2.5
= 0.15 x 1.0 x 1.0 x
3.75
= 0.1g
Base Shear
Base shear, Fb = Sd(T1).W = 0.1 x (918 + 993 + 993) = 290.4 kN
Seismic Forces Per Storey
Assuming that the base shear is linearly distributed along the height of the building, the seismic forces at level i are
given by Fi where zi is the height of the storey from the ground.
z i .Wi
Fi = Fb .
∑ z j .W j
z3 = 3m, z2 = 6m, z1 = 9m
ΣzjWj = 3 x 993 + 6 x 993 + 9 x 918 = 17199 kNm
Seismic force at Level 3, F1 = 290.4 x (9 x 918) / 17199 = 139.5 kN

578
Second Edition
F1 = 139.5 kN Level 3
F2 = 100.6 kN Level 2
z1
F3 = 50.3 kN Level 1 z2
z3
5.1.5.5.3 Seismic Loads using Multi-Modal Analysis
The flexibility matrix of the 3 storey shear frame model is obtained from the structural static analysis program by
successively applying 1kN unit loads at each storey and each time measuring the total displacement at all the storey
levels.
Flexibility Matrix
 f1,1 f1, 2 f1,3   0.040 0.024 0.009 

   
F =  f 2,1 f 2,2 f 2,3  =  0.024 0.022 0.009  mm/kN
f f 3, 2 f 3,3   0.009 0.009 0.007 
 3,1
The slab contribution to the flexural capacity of the frame has been neglected in that the effective width of the top
flange of the beams is taken as the width of the web of the beam. Hence in reality, the slab would actually provide a
slightly stiffer response to that predicted.
Stiffness Matrix
 73.441 − 87.525 18.109 

 
K = F −1 =  − 87.525 200.201 − 144.869  kN / mm
 18.109 − 144.869 305.835 
 
 73441 − 87525 18109 
 
=  − 87525 200201 − 144869  kN / m
 18109 − 144869 305835 
 
Mass Matrix
 93.578 0 0 
 
M= 0 101.223 0  tonnes
 0 0 101.223 

The mass matrix is the seismic weight at each level as calculated includes the full dead load and 30% of the live
load.
Eigenvalues ω2
To find ω2, we solve the eigenvalue equation  K - ω2 M  = 0
 73441 − 93.578ω 2 − 87525 18109 

 
K − ω2 M =  − 87525 200201 − 101.223ω 2 − 144869 
 2
 18109 − 144869 305835 − 101.223ω 
579
Second Edition
Hence the eigenvalue equation is given by:
 K - ω2 M  = 0.1006036 x 1016 − 0.6718900 x 1013 ω2 + 0.5545779 x 1010 ω4 − 958809.146 ω6 = 0
 ω12   173.959  ωI represents the fundamental natural circular frequency

   
ω 2 =  ω 22  =  1449.824  of this structure as it is the smallest. This gives the
 2    fundamental mode shape and the fundamental period.
 ω3   4160.245 
Mode Shapes φ
The equation [ K - ω i2 M ][φ i] = 0 is solved for i = 1 to 3 to give the three different mode shapes.
[K − ω M ][φ ] = [0]
i
2
i for i = 1, 2, 3
Normalising the first row to unity,

 1 1 1  φ1 is the fundamental mode shape, i.e. the shape
φ = φ1[ φ2 ]
φ 3 = 0.715 − 0.906 − 2.840
 that requires the least amount of energy to
vibrate.
0.297 − 0.939 3.726 
Modal Mass (Generalized Mass), Participation Factor and Effective Mass

It is necessary to compute the contribution of each mode of vibration to the response of the structure. To this end
the effective mass, which represents the structure as a single-degree-of-freedom system, is computed.
Modal mass (generalized mass) GMi = φiT M φi, modal force amplitude Li = φiT M{1}, effective mass mi = Li 2 /
GMi for i = 1 to 3
 93.578 0 0  1 
  
GM = φ Mφ = (1 0.715 0.297 ) 0
1 1T 1
101.223 0  0.715  = 154.215
 0 0 101.223  0.297 

 93.578 0 0 1
  
L = φ M{1} = (1 0.715 0.297 ) 0
1 1T
101.223 0 1 = 195.959
 0 0 101.223 1

2
L1 195.959 2
m =
1
= = 249.0
GM1 154.215
 93.578 0 0  1 
  
GM = φ Mφ
2 2T 2
= (1 − 0.906 − 0.939 ) 0 101.223 0  − 0.906  = 265.846
 0 0 101.223  − 0.939 

 93.578 0 0 1
  
L = φ M{1} = (1 − 0.906 − 0.939 ) 0
2 2T
101.223 0 1 = -93.141
 0 0 101.223 1

2
L2 - 93.1412
m2 = 2
= = 32.6
GM 265.846
580
Second Edition
 93.578 0 0  1 
  
GM = φ Mφ = (1 − 2.840 3.726 ) 0
3 3T 3
101.223 0  − 2.840  = 2315.248
 0 0 101.223  3.726 

 93.578 0 0 1
  
L = φ M{1} = (1 − 2.840 3.726 ) 0
3 3T
101.223 0 1 = 183.271
 0 0 101.223 1

2
L3 183.2712
m =
3
= = 14.5
GM 3 2315.248
Hence,
GM = [154.215 265.846 2315.248]

L = [195.959 − 93.141 183.271]
m = [249 32.6 14.5]
= [84% 11% 5%]
The effective mass associated with the fundamental mode of vibration, m1 is clearly the largest at 84% of the total
mass, and hence the forces imparted upon the structure vibrating in this fundamental mode are the most damaging
(i.e. the critical case).
Natural Periods of Vibration
 T1   0.48 
2π    
T= =  T2  =  0.17  seconds The fundamental period is 0.48 seconds.
ω    
 T3   0.10 
Inelastic Response Spectrum of EC8
From previous soil response analysis of Section 5.1.2.15.1,

(i) Subsoil class “B”. Hence, S = 1.0, β0 = 2.5, TB = 0.15 and TC = 0.6.
(ii) Design ground acceleration in terms of g, α = 0.15
Also, because the structure is of reinforced concrete, the critical viscous damping ζ is 5%. Hence, η = (7/(2+ζ))0.5 =
1. The behaviour factor q = 3.75, as before.
β0
Spectral acceleration, S d (T1 = 0.48) = α.S.η. TB ≤ T1 ≤ TC
q
2.5
= 0.15 x 1.0 x 1.0 x
3.75
= 0.100g
β0
Spectral acceleration, S d (T2 = 0.17) = α.S.η. TB ≤ T2 ≤ TC
q
2.5
= 0.15 x 1.0 x 1.0 x
3.75
= 0.100g
581
Second Edition
 T β 
Spectral acceleration, S d (T3 = 0.10) = α.S.1 + 3 .(η. 0 − 1) , 0 ≤ T3 ≤ TB
 TB q 
 0.10 2.5 
= 0.15 x 1.0 x 1 + .(1 x − 1)
 0.15 3.75 
= 0.117g
Modal Force Response
The modal force responses are the horizontal loads at each level for the different mode shapes.
Li
f i = Mφ i S e ,i for i = 1 ,2, 3
GM i
 93.578 0 0  1  116.6 
L1    195.959  
f1 = M φ Sd ,1 =  0 0.100 x 9.81 =  90.2  kN
1
101.223 0  0.715 
GM1  0 154.215
 0 101.223  0.297   37.4 
 
 93.578 0 0  1   − 32.2 
2 L2    - 93.141  
f 2 = Mφ Sd , 2 =  0 101.223 0  − 0.906  0.100 x 9.81 =  31.5  kN
GM 2  0 265.846
 0 101.223  − 0.939   32.7 
 
 93.578 0 0  1   8.5 
3 L3    183.271  
f 3 = Mφ Sd,3 =  0 101.223 0  − 2.840  0.117 x 9.81 =  − 26.1 kN
GM 3  0 2315.248
 0 101.223  3.726   34.3 
 
116.6 − 32.2 8.5 

 
f =  90.2 31.5 − 26.1 kN
 37.4 32.7 34.3 

Modal Combination using SRSS
As the natural periods of vibration are not too closely spaced between the different modes, the Square Root of the
Sum of Squares, SRSS, is used to combine the modal responses providing a reasonable estimate of the total
maximum response.
121.3 
 
ff j = ∑ f j2,i =  99.0  kN
i  60.4 
 
13.0 
F − ff  
∆= x100% =  1.6  %
F  20.1
 
Since this structure is regular, higher modes of vibrations are rather insignificant. The fundamental period is also
less than 2, hence the simplified equivalent lateral force analysis method is sufficient.
582
Second Edition
5.1.5.5.4 Structural Static Analysis
A structural static analysis is now carried out using the forces computed with the simplified equivalent lateral force
and the vertical loads, given by 1.0 Gk + 0.3 Qk, shown in below. The next two figures show the bending moment
and the shear force diagrams.
-38.3 kN/m -38.3 kN/m -38.3 kN/m -38.3 kN/m -38.3 kN/m
140 kN
101 kN
50.3 kN
Loading
159 kNm 147 kNm 148

49.4 kNm 83.3 kNm 81.9 kNm 89.3kNm
kNm 127 kNm
193 kNm 188 kNm 186 kNm 185 kNm

45.6 kNm 59.2 kNm 62 kNm 61.4 kNm
12 kNm -67 kNm -62.5 kNm -61.9 kNm -83.5 kNm
90.9 kNm 129 kNm 126 kNm 126 kNm 136 kNm
Bending Moment Diagram
133 kN 125 kN 126 kN 121 kN

33.1 kN -66.9 kN
-96.5 kN -104 kN -104 kN -108 kN
149 kN 146 kN 145 kN 145 kN

33.1
3.6 kN
kN -58.3 kN -66.9
-72.6 kN
-99.6 kN -103 kN -104 kN -104 kN
154 kN 148 kN 148 kN 147 kN

3.6
-26.3
kNkN -58.3 kN -62.9 kN -72.6
-73.3 kN
-94.4 kN -101 kN -100 kN -102 kN
-26.3 kN -62.9 kN -73.3 kN
Shear Force Diagram
583
Second Edition
5.1.5.5.5 Serviceability Limit Verification
The displacements computed in the analysis, shown below, are used to verify that the serviceability limit has not
been exceeded.
8.6 mm
6.0 mm
2.5 mm
Horizontal Displacements
EC8 sets limits on the deformation that is allowed at each level under seismic action. This relative displacement
(drift) should not exceed 0.4% of the height of the story, thus for each storey of the structure this drift should not
exceed 12mm.
The figure shows the displacements at each level:

Storey 3: ∆r = 0.0086-0.0060 = 0.0026m (< 0.012m)
Storey 2: ∆r = 0.0060-0.0025 = 0.0035m (< 0.012m)
Storey 1: ∆r = 0.0025-0.0000 = 0.0025m (< 0.012m)
What we have here is the elastic displacement due to the inelastic forces, however this is unacceptable for design
purposes. To obtain the inelastic displacements these elastic displacements are multiplied by the behaviour factor,
q. This gives:
Storey 3: ∆r = 0.0026 x 3.75 = 0.00975m (< 0.012m)

Storey 2: ∆r = 0.0035 x 3.75 = 0.01313m (> 0.012m)
Storey 1: ∆r = 0.0025 x 3.75 = 0.00938m (< 0.012m)
Hence on the second storey the drift fractionally exceeds the limit, however the analysis does not take into account
the stiffness of the slab. Therefore this design is probably satisfactory but may entail slight adjustments to the
section in question.
584
Second Edition
5.1.5.6 MSC.NASTRAN Decks
There are two parts to a response spectrum analysis, namely the generation of the spectrum and the use of the
spectrum to compute the dynamic response. The response spectrum analysis is the only dynamic analysis method
that requires a SUPORT entry to define the input DOFs for the spectra.
The procedure involves two stages. First the applied loads or base excitations are converted in a direct transient
solution (SOL 109) into a spectrum table consisting of peak response magnitudes for a set of single degree-of-
freedom oscillators. Each oscillator is a scalar spring/mass/damper having a different natural frequency and
damping ratio. This stage is optional since the shock spectrum data is frequently given in the contractual design
specifications or, in the case of earthquakes, is available through governmental agencies. The second stage of the
analysis consists of a modal analysis of the structure, data recovery, and the response calculation that combines the
modal properties of the analysis model with the spectrum data of the applied loads. This stage is performed in a
modal analysis solution sequence (SOL 103). If a database was saved from the first stage, a restart will provide the
spectrum data automatically. Otherwise, the spectrum data must be supplied in a direct tabular input (response
versus natural frequency for several damping ratios).
5.1.5.6.1 Theoretical Background
585
Second Edition
586
Second Edition
5.1.5.6.2 Response Spectra Generation
Response spectra are generated in the transient response solution sequences (SOL 109 for direct and SOL 112 for
modal). Transient response input is required to apply the transient excitation to the base structure. Additional input
is described.
Relative and absolute spectra are denoted by IP and RM, respectively, in the parentheses of the curve request.
There are two FREQi entries: one to specify oscillator frequencies (i.e., frequencies for which spectra will be
computed) and the other to specify oscillator damping. (Note that damping for the base structure is specified in
another manner, such as with the TABDMP1 entry used for modal transient response analysis.)
5.1.5.6.3 Peak Response Calculation
Response spectrum application is a postprocessing function of normal modes analysis (SOL 103). It is run in the
normal modes solution sequences, so the modelling and analysis considerations that apply for normal modes
analysis also apply for response spectrum application. The additional considerations also need to be followed:
1. The structure is run as an unrestrained model in the direction(s) of the load spectrum application.
2. A large mass, on the order of 103 to 106 times the mass of the structure, must be used at the structure’s
base grid points where the input occurs. One way to do this is to use RBEs or MPCs to connect the base
points to a separate grid point, and apply the large mass to that separate grid point. This separate grid point
is where the spectrum is applied.
3. A SUPORT Bulk Data entry is required at the spectrum input location.
4. The modes must be mass normalized (which is the default).
The spectra that MSC.Nastran can apply are absolute acceleration, relative displacement, and relative velocity
spectra. You specify A, D, or V for acceleration displacement or velocity, respectively, to specify the spectrum
type. Use all modes within the frequency range specified by the spectrum, but do not use modes outside of the
587
Second Edition
spectrum range. Usually, spectra to apply are considered to have zero values outside of their range of definition; for
example, an absolute acceleration spectrum defined from 0 to 30 Hz is assumed to be zero beyond 30Hz. However,
MSC.Nastran extrapolates spectral values for modes beyond the spectral range, which may lead to unexpected
answers. You can limit the number of modes used in the spectrum application by limiting the number of computed
modes (via the EIGRL or EIGR entry) or by using PARAM,HFREQ,r (where r is the highest frequency mode to
use) or PARAM,LMODES,n (where n is the number of lowest modes to use).
Consider the entire response spectrum process—generation and application—as a two-step process. Step 1 is
generation of the response spectra and Step 2 is the application of the response spectra. For a given input, transient
applied to the base structure (Step 1), the same stresses occur (Step 2) regardless of whether acceleration or
displacement spectra were computed in Step 1. However, displacements and accelerations are different, because
answers computed by using the absolute acceleration spectrum contain the rigid body contribution, whereas
answers computed by using the relative displacement spectrum do not contain the rigid body contribution.
Displacement and acceleration responses can be made equal regardless of which spectra was used by using
PARAM,LFREQ,0.01 (or some other small number) to remove the rigid body mode contribution from the answers.
Stresses and other element quantities are unaffected by the contribution of any rigid body modes. The same
situation applies to relative velocity spectra as to relative displacement spectra.
All input listed in the table is required with the exception of PARAM,OPTION and PARAM,CLOSE.
The time step (field 4 on the TSTEP Bulk Data entry, DT) should not be changed during the run, because
MSC.Nastran uses only the initial DT specification for the entire response spectrum generation run and therefore
wrong answers could occur. The time step, DT, and time duration, (where is the number of time increments), must
take into account the loading, the base structure, and the frequency range of the spectra generation. The time step
must take into account the frequency content of the applied excitation, the frequencies of the base structure, and the
highest frequency for which spectra are to be generated. There must be enough time steps per cycle of response for
both the base structure and the highest frequency oscillator in order to accurately predict the peak response; 5 to 10
steps per cycle represent a typical value. In addition, the time duration of the loading, the frequencies of the base
588
Second Edition
structure, and the lowest oscillator frequency must be considered when defining the time duration. There must be a
long enough time duration of response both for the base structure and the lowest frequency oscillator in order to
accurately predict the peak response. For short duration loadings, the peak response often occurs well after the load
has peaked. Initial conditions (specified via the TIC Bulk Data entry) are not used in response spectrum generation.
Initial conditions are used in the calculation of the transient response of the base structure, but the calculation of the
peak oscillator responses (i.e., the response spectrum calculation) ignores any initial conditions.
589
Second Edition
5.1.6 Reinforced Concrete Design to EC8 for Earthquake Effects Based on Response Spectrum Analysis
5.1.6.1 Concepts of Ductility
The definition of ductility is

Deformation Quantity at Ultimate
µ=
Deformation Quantity at Yield
The deformation considered may be curvature µφ, rotation µθ, or displacement µδ, commonly the latter.
5.1.6.1.1 Section Ductility

Curvature ductility, µ φ = φ u / φ y
where φy = yield of reinforcement
- higher As, Asv, and fy would increase ductility as φy decreases
- Asv increases confinement hence increasing ductility
where φu = ultimate compressive strain of concrete, i.e. concrete crushing
- higher axial load increases compressive strain, hence decreasing ductility as φu decreases
5.1.6.1.2 Member Ductility

∆u θ
Displacement ductility, µ ∆ = and Rotation ductility, µ θ = u
∆y θy
where ∆y = yield of reinforcement
- higher As, Asv, and fy would increase ductility as ∆y decreases
where ∆u = ultimate compressive strain of concrete, i.e. concrete crushing or buckling or fracture of rebars
- higher axial load increases P-∆ effects, hence decreasing ductility as ∆u decreases
- higher levels of Asv will decrease risk of buckling of rebars, hence increasing ductility by increasing ∆u
- strain hardening rebars will promote spread of inelasticity, hence lengthening the plastic hinge length,
increasing ductility as ∆u increases
5.1.6.1.3 Structural Ductility

Structural ductility = Total drift at top of structure / Total base shear
or Structural ductility = behaviour factor q = ability to achieve inelastic deformations
I. Capacity design concepts should be employed. The structure is viewed comprising of dissipative and non-
dissipative parts. The dissipative zone mobilizes desired failure mode and avoids collapse and maximizes the
energy dissipation.
(a) The dissipative zones are dimensioned first and carefully detailed to posses maximum ductility
(b) Their likely sources of over-strength is estimated:-
- higher concrete compressive strength, fcu
- higher yield strength of steel, fy
- larger area of steel rebars, As
- slab contribution to effective flange compressive area in the case of beams
- confinement
- strain-hardening characteristics of steel
(c) The non-dissipative parts are then designed to withstand forces consistent with the strength of dissipative
parts, including over-strength. Hence the non-dissipative parts do not reach MP i.e. its plastic capacity until
the dissipative parts have reached MP and absorbed considerable energy through ductility.
II. Continuity and redundancy between members to ensure clear load path
III. Regularity of mass, stiffness and strength distribution to avoid torsional effects and soft-storeys
IV. Reduced mass
V. Sufficient stiffness to avoid highly flexible structures with significant P-∆ effects and non-structural damage.
590
Second Edition
5.1.6.2 Capacity Design for Optimum Location and Sequence of Attainment of Member Capacity
Whereas in static design, under-estimating the member strength is an added safety procedure, this is not the case in
seismic design. This is because the location and sequence of attainment of member capacity are very important for
the collapse prevention and optimum response, respectively.
Location of attainment of MP Hinges should form in beams and not columns in order to avoid an unstable
mechanism that will lead to collapse.
Sequence of attainment of MP Using the ductility of elements to absorb energy instead of the yield strength is a
more optimum method. MC1
We thus require beam hinges and not column

hinges. Except at the base of the column, hinges are MB
not accepted anywhere else on the column. The MC2
method of utilizing capacity design is as follows
Obtain the structural member forces from structural analysis of the earthquake excitation
I. Design beam to resist MB
II. Estimate the over-strength of the beam, the sources of which are fc, fy, As, slab contribution; Say
MBactual = 1.25MB
III. Scale up MC1 and MC2 to satisfy equilibrium with 1.25MB. If the column stiffness were equal, then
MC1=MC2=0.625MB instead of 0.5MB.
IV. Hence, the beam plastic hinge will definitely occur first, and the energy will then be absorbed by the
ductility of the member. The plastic capacity of the columns won’t be reached; instead the mechanism
collapses when the ductility limit of the beam has been attained.
5.1.6.3 Capacity Design for Favourable Mechanism of Deformation
Flexural deformation is the more favourable mechanism of dissipation of energy than shear deformation because it
is more ductile. To ensure flexural deformation precedes shear deformation, consider the design for a cantilever.
P
1. Design M=PL, hence design beam for bending capacity M=PL.
2. Estimate over-strength of Mactualcapacity = 1.25M = 1.25PL.
M
3. Design beam for shear force in equilibrium with 1.25PL, i.e.
Shear cracking Vdesign = 1.25PL.
Flexural cracking
A point to note is that having strain hardening steel rebars is favourable for an efficient bending deformation energy
dissipating mechanism. Perfectly plastic rebars will cause the formation of only one flexural crack. Hence the
plastic hinge length will be short and hence the ductility requirement at that section is considerable. Strain
hardening rebars will cause the formation of many flexural cracks. Hence the plastic hinge length will be long and
hence the ductility requirement per section along the hinge length is reduced. The latter represents a far more
efficient energy dissipating mechanism.
In the case of RC walls, the shear force consistent with the flexural strength, increased by a factor of about 20% in
recognition of i) unintentional increase in steel yield fy, ii) round up of As, iii) strain hardening of flexural
reinforcement and iv) additional fcu, is used to determine the shear capacity needed. Hence, flexural failure precedes
shear failure.
591
Second Edition
5.1.6.4 Introduction of Example Problem
Following the determination of the seismic action, the reinforced concrete beams and columns are now designed.
The design of the beams is based on EC2, which governs the design of concrete structures, and that of the columns
is based on EC8, which makes provisions for the earthquake resistance of structures. The regularity of the structure
in plan enables the analysis to be based on a typical frame as shown below. The floor slabs are assumed to be
infinitely rigid (i.e. no large openings etc.) in order to distribute the floor shear forces amongst the columns in
diaphragm action.
3m
3m
3m
6m 6m 6m 6m
5.1.6.5 Design Data
Material used for design: Concrete class C25/30, longitudinal steel S400, transverse steel S220
Concrete cover to reinforcement is 30mm.
⇒ Concrete design strength, fcd = 25/1.5 = 16.7MPa
⇒ Longitudinal steel strength, fyd = 400/1.15 = 347.8MPa
⇒ Transverse steel strength, fyd = 220/1.15 = 191.3MPa
5.1.6.6 Beam Design for Vertical Loading According to EC2
5.1.6.6.1 Structural Loading
Assume a concrete volumetric weight of 25 kN/m3.

Initial sizing of beam, web = 0.3m, depth = 0.5m from previous project.
Loads on Slabs
Self-weight of slab + partitions, G = 6 kN/m2

Live load, Q = 3 kN/m2
Loads on Beams
Dead load on beam, Gk = self-weight + slab dead load x width = 0.3 x 0.5 x 25 + 6 x 5 = 33.75 kN/m
Live load on beam, Qk = slab live load x width = 3 x 5 = 15 kN/m
592
Second Edition
5.1.6.6.2 Determination of Maximum Action Effects
The maximum bending moment is calculated for the different combinations of 1.35G + 1.5Q. The following gives
the maximum elastic bending moment in the spans and the maximum elastic bending moment in the supports. The
range of values for both the moments in the spans and the supports is not very large so only one beam needs to be
designed for the entire structure.
MAXIMUM BENDING MOMENT IN SPANS WITH 1.35G+1.5Q
1.35G + 1.5Q 1.0G 1.35G + 1.5Q 1.0G
1.0G 1.35G + 1.5Q 1.0G 1.35G + 1.5Q
1.35G + 1.5Q 1.0G 1.35G + 1.5Q 1.0G
LOADING DIAGRAM
Max: 194 kNm Max: 189 kNm
Max: -130 kNm Max: -121 kNm
BENDING MOMENT DIAGRAM
593
Second Edition
MAXIMUM BENDING MOMENT IN SUPPORT
1.35G 1.35G 1.35G 1.35G
1.35G 1.35G 1.35G 1.35G
1.35G 1.35G 1.35G 1.35G
LOADING DIAGRAM
221 kNm 203 kNm 206 kNm

157 kNm
193 kNm 207 kNm 206 kNm 202 kNm
182 kNm 211 kNm 203 kNm 206 kNm
BENDING MOMENT DIAGRAM
594
Second Edition
SEISMIC LOADCASE G+0.3Q+E
1.0G + 0.3Q 1.0G + 0.3Q 1.0G + 0.3Q 1.0G + 0.3Q
140 kN -4.5 kN/m -4.5 kN/m -4.5 kN/m -4.5 kN/m -4.5 kN/m
1.0G + 0.3Q 1.0G + 0.3Q 1.0G + 0.3Q 1.0G + 0.3Q
101 kN -4.5 kN/m -4.5 kN/m -4.5 kN/m -4.5 kN/m -4.5 kN/m
1.0G + 0.3Q 1.0G + 0.3Q 1.0G + 0.3Q 1.0G + 0.3Q
50.3-4.5
kN kN/m -4.5 kN/m -4.5 kN/m -4.5 kN/m -4.5 kN/m
LOADING DIAGRAM
160 kNm
Max: 160 kNm 147 kNm
Max: 126 kNm
48.7 kNm 83.4 kNm 89.6 kNm
Max: -72.4 kNm Max: -58.4 kNm Max: -64.6 kNm
183 kNm
Max: 177 kNm
37.4 kNm 49.7 kNm 52.6 kNm 51.5 kNm
Max: -69.5 kNm Max: -63.9 kNm Max: -63.3 kNm Max: -63.7 kNm
196 kNm
Max: 182 kNm
18.8 kNm 44 kNm 43.1 kNm 44.2 kNm
Max: -76.1 kNm Max: -64.4 kNm Max: -64.8 kNm Max: -66 kNm
BENDING MOMENT DIAGRAM FOR

BEAMS
595
Second Edition
48.7 kNm -76.2 kNm -65.2 kNm -58.4 kNm -126 kNm 31.8 kN -40.3 kN -34.5 kN -30.9 kN -65.6 kN
-9.31
-46.7kNm
kNm 44.7
-89.1
kNmkNm 38.2
-88.1
kNmkNm 34.4
-90.2
kNmkNm 70.4-106
kNmkNm 31.8
0.387kNkN -40.3
-58.1 kN
kN -34.5
-56.2 kN
kN -30.9
-56.8 kN
kN -65.6
-69.4 kN
8.38
-10.5kNm
kNm 85.1
-67kNm
kNm 80.4
-62.5
kNmkNm 80.3
-61.8
kNmkNm 102-79.9
kNmkNm 0.387
-28.2 kN -58.1
-65.4 kN -56.2
-62.9 kN -56.8
-62.4 kN -69.4
-71.4 kN
92.8 kNm 129 kNm 126 kNm 126 kNm 134 kNm
-28.2 kN -65.4 kN -62.9 kN -62.4 kN -71.4 kN
BENDING MOMENT
DIAGRAM FOR COLUMNS
SHEAR FORCE DIAGRAM
FOR COLUMNS
133 kN 125 kN 126 kN 121 kN 96.3 kN 237 kN 229 kN 234 kN 121 kN

-96.3 kN -104 kN -104 kN -109 kN
139 kN 136 kN 135 kN 136 kN 96.3

187 kN
kN 237
470 kN 229
460 kN 234
464 kN 121
256 kN
-90.4 kN -93.2 kN -94.2 kN -93.9 kN
144 kN 138 kN 139 kN 138 kN 187

272 kN 470
705 kN 460
689 kN 464
694 kN 256
394 kN
-85.2 kN -91.1 kN -90.9 kN -91.8 kN
272 kN 705 kN 689 kN 694 kN 394 kN
AXIAL FORCE DIAGRAM

FOR COLUMNS
596
Second Edition
5.1.6.6.3 Design for Bending
Redistribution
Redistribution is carried out in order to optimise the design by obtaining a more uniform distribution of the action
effects. The maximum value of the bending moment is 221 kNm. The redistribution is to be carried out for each
beam.
First a 15% redistribution is applied, i.e. δ = 0.85:
MSd = 0.85 x 221 = 187.85 kNm

M Sd
First the normalised moment, µ, is calculated: µ=
bd 2 f cd
187.85 x
⇒ µ= = 0.17 ⇒ Table 1 ⇒ = 0.28
0.3 × 0.47 × 16.7 × 10
2 3
d
x
The condition stipulated in EC2 is that δ ≥ 0.44 + 1.25 . This is to ensure that the beam is adequately ductile.
d
Since 0.44+1.25x0.28 = 0.79, is less than 0.85, so the design can proceed, taking maximum support moments of
187.85 kNm.
To find the maximum moments in the midspan after redistribution:

2 2
 M R − M L pλ   − 187.85 + 160 68.1 × 6 
 +   + 
+  λ 2   6 2 
M max = M L + = −160 + = 132.7 kNm
2p 2 × 68.1
New values of the maximum shear force can be checked by taking moments about the support. In general this does
not make a difference, e.g. the maximum value of 215kN was reduced to 210kN. These changes are negligible.
Design of Longitudinal Positive Reinforcement
(i) Effective width, bef = 0.3 + 0.2 x (0.85 x 6) = 1.32 m

M 132.7
(ii) Normalised moment, µ, is calculated: µ = 2Sd = = 0.027
bd f cd 1.32 × 0.47 2 × 16.7 × 103
From Table 110 ⇒ ω = 0.028; ξ = 0.084
(iii) Check if the neutral axis depth is within the section’s flange:
x = 0.084 x 0.47 = 0.039 m (< 0.12m)
bdf cd 1.32 × 0.47 × 16.7
(iv) The area of steel is calculated: A s = ω = 0.028 × ≅ 8.34 cm 2
f yd 347.8
From Table 2 ⇒ 6φ14 (9.24cm2)
(v) Detailing checks: The minimum area of reinforcement is given as 0.0015bd = 2.25 cm2 ⇒ OK
The maximum area of reinforcement is given as 0.04Ac = 60 cm2 ⇒ OK
Design of Longitudinal Negative Reinforcement
(i) Effective width, bef = bw = 0.3m

M Sd 187.85
(ii) Normalised moment, µ, is calculated: µ = = = 0.170
bd f cd 0.3 × 0.47 2 × 16.7 × 10 3
2
10
CEB 1992
597
Second Edition
From Table 111 ⇒ ω = 0.192; ξ = 0.280

bdf cd 0.3 × 0.47 × 16.7
(iii) The area of steel is calculated: A s = ω = 0.192 × ≅ 13.00 cm 2
f yd 347.8
From Table 2 ⇒ 7φ16 (14.07cm2)
(iv) Detailing checks: The minimum area of reinforcement is given as 0.0015bd = 2.25 cm2 ⇒ OK
The maximum area of reinforcement is given as 0.04Ac = 60 cm2 ⇒ OK
5.1.6.7 Capacity Check for Seismic Loading of Beams
Actual moment capacity of positive reinforcement = Asfyd(d-x/2)

= 924 x 347.8 x (470-39/2) = 144.776 x 106 Nmm = 144.7 kNm
Actual moment capacity of negative reinforcement = Asfyd(d-x/2)
= 1407 x 347.8 x (470-131.6/2) = 197.8x106 Nmm = 197.8 kNm
The required moments for the seismic action-effects are 196 kNm at the support and 72.4 kNm at the span, which
are lower than the actual capacities as calculated above.
11
CEB 1992
598
Second Edition
5.1.6.8 Design of Transverse Reinforcement
The maximum shear force, VSd = 215kN, at the internal support of the left beam on the top floor is due to the
vertical load case. The seismic load combination is only 144kN, so we design for the vertical load case, hence we
use EC2. The design value of 215kN can be reduced to 215 - ρd = 183kN which corresponds to the shear force at a
distance d from the support.
5.1.6.8.1 Check Maximum Design Force That Can Be Carried Without Crushing of Concrete
VSd = 183kN
VRd2 = maximum design force that can be carried without crushing of concrete
VRd2 = 0.5νfcdbw x 0.9d where ν = (0.7-fck/200) = 0.575 ≥ 0.5
VRd2 = 608.1 kN > 183kN ⇒ OK, there is no increase of dimensions required.
5.1.6.8.2 Check If Shear Reinforcement Is Required
VRd1 = design shear of a member without shear reinforcement

VRd1 = [τRdk(1.2+40ρ1)+0.15σcp]bwd
τRd = 0.035fck2/3 = 300kPa
k = 1.6-d = 1.13, however, much of the bottom reinforcement will be curtailed before the supports (only
30% extends into the support) and thus does not contribute to shear resistance, so k will be taken as unity.
π × 16 2 π × 14 2
7× + 2×
A
ρ= s = 4 4 = 0.012 (≤ 0.02 )
bwd 300 × 470
σ cp ≈ 0
So, VRd1 = [300x1x(1.2+40x0.012)] x 0.3 x 0.47 =71 kN (<183kN)
Since VRd1 < VSd the beam requires shear reinforcement.
5.1.6.8.3 Design Required Shear Reinforcement
Vwd = VSd - VRd1 = 183 – 71 = 112kN
The shear reinforcement is given by the following equation, where As and s are unknown:
A sw Vwd 112
≥ = = 1.38mm 2 / mm
s 0.9df ywd 0.9 × 0.47 × 191.3
Assuming a diameter of 10 mm, remembering that there are two links across the section, the maximum spacing is
114 mm. So, choose shear links, φ10@110mm
5.1.6.8.4 Check Code Limits
⇒ 1/5 x 608 = 121.6 kN; 2/3 x VRd2 = 405.3kN

⇒ 1/5VRd2 < VSd < 2/3VRd1
The spacing of the transverse reinforcement should not exceed the lesser of the following three distances:
a) 12 x the minimum diameter of the longitudinal bars = 12 x 14 = 168mm
b) the least dimension of the column = 300mm
c) 300mm
⇒ OK
599
Second Edition
5.1.6.9 Column Design
The seismic load case is clearly the critical combination of actions for the columns. So this combination will be
used for the design of the columns. Initial size of columns assumed from previous project as 500x400 mm.
5.1.6.9.1 M-N Pairs and Normalised Actions

M N
The normalised actions are given by: µ = 2Sd ; ν = Sd
bh f cd bhf cd
ωtot is obtained from the M-N interaction diagrams
Internal Column
Storey Seismic Static
N (kN) M µ ν ωtot N (kN) M µ ν ωtot
(kNm) (kNm)
3 237 76.2 0.0456 0.057 0.080 419 74 0.0443 0.100 0
2 470 89.1 0.0534 0.113 0.030 830 47.7 0.0286 0.199 0
1 705 129 0.0772 0.169 0.060 1243 60.5 0.0362 0.298 0
External Column
Storey Seismic Static
N (kN) M µ ν ωtot N (kN) M µ ν ωtot
(kNm) (kNm)
3 121 126 0.0754 0.029 0.180 194 157 0.0940 0.046 0.16
2 256 106 0.0635 0.061 0.060 395 101 0.0605 0.095 0.02
1 394 134 0.0802 0.094 0.100 595 80.9 0.0484 0.143 0
The minimum total reinforcement ratio, ρtot, allowed by the code is 1%. This corresponds to a mechanical ratio,
ωtot,min = ρtot (fyd/fcd) = 0.01(347.8/16.7) = 0.208, which is larger than all the values calculated.
Therefore the minimum requirement is used to determine the reinforcement areas for both exterior and interior
columns:
1
( )
A S1 = A S 2 = ω tot bh f cd / f yd = 0.5 × 0.208 × 2000 × (16.7 / 347.8) = 10 cm 2
2
Two 22 mm bars, one at each corner, and one intermediate 20 mm bar provide adequate reinforcement for the
columns on each side. The total area is 27.8 cm2 and the total reinforcement ratio is 1.4%.
In theory, the columns should be redesigned to give a more economical solution since they are being controlled by
the minimum reinforcement requirements. However, this would result in the breaking of code limits so minimum
requirements dominate in both the exterior and the interior columns.
Hence, one standard column design is used for both interior and exterior columns with minimum nominal steel
reinforcement.
600
Second Edition
5.1.6.9.2 Capacity Design Considerations
The following calculations are based on the seismic load case 1.0G + 0.3Q + 1.0E.
Exterior Beam-Column Joints
For ductility class ‘M’, γRd = 1.2
a) For direction '1' of seismic action,

the top of the beam is in tension
(i) actual beam moment capacity, M Rd = 182 x (14.07/13.00) = 197 kNm
M lR1 + M rR1
(ii) sum of moments ratio, α CD1 = γ Rd
M So1 + M Su1
0 + 197
= 1.2 x = 1.30
102 + 79.9
M Sr 1 − M Sl 1 0 − 182
(iii) the moment reversal factor, δ1 = = = 0.92
M rR1 + M lR1 0 + 197
(iv) capacity design requirement, M Sd1,CD = 1 + (α CD,1 − 1)δ1 M Sd1
CD = 1 + (1.30 − 1)0.92 (102) = 130.2

o
column over joint, M Sd1,
axial load acting on column above joint, N o = −256kN, hence ν = −0.08
2π22 2 / 4 + π20 2 / 4
reinforcement ratio for one side of column, ρ1 = = 0.0054
400 × 500
( )
hence, ω tot = 2ρ1 f yd / f cd = 0.224
giving from interaction diagram design charts, µ = 0.12
thus, M oRd = µbh 2 f cd = 0.12 × 0.4 × 0.5 2 × 16.7 × 10 3 = 200.4 > M oCD = 130.2
thus there is no need to change the column reinforcement.
CD = 1 + (1.30 − 1)0.92 (79.9) = 102.0
u
column under joint, M Sd1,
axial load acting on column under joint, N u = −394kN, hence ν = −0.12
2π22 2 / 4 + π20 2 / 4
400 × 500
( )
thus, M uRd = µbh 2 f cd = 0.13 × 0.4 × 0.5 2 × 16.7 × 10 3 = 217.1 > M CD
u
= 102.0
601
Second Edition
b) For direction '2' of seismic action,

the top of the beam is still in tension
(i) actual beam moment capacity, M Rd = 18.8 x (14.07/13.00) = 20.3 kNm
M lR 2 + M rR 2
(ii) sum of moments ratio, α CD 2 = γ Rd
M So 2 + M Su2
0 + 20.3
= 1.2 x = 1.29
10.5 + 8.38
M Sr 2 − M Sl 2 0 + 18.8
(iii) the moment reversal factor, δ 2 = = = 0.93
M rR 2 + M lR 2 0 + 20.3
(iv) capacity design requirement, M Sd2,CD = 1 + (α CD , 2 − 1)δ 2 M Sd 2
CD = 1 + (1.29 − 1)0.93 (10.5) = 13.3

o
2π22 2 / 4 + π20 2 / 4
400 × 500
( )
CD = 1 + (1.29 − 1)0.93 (8.4) = 10.7
u
2π22 2 / 4 + π20 2 / 4
400 × 500
( )
u
= 10.7
602
Second Edition
Interior Beam-Column Joints
For ductility class ‘M’, γRd = 1.2
a) For direction '1' of seismic action,

the top of the beam is in tension
(i) actual beam moment capacity, M lRd = 1 96 x (14.07/13.00) = 212.1 kNm
M rRd = 44 x (14.07/13.00) = 47.6 kNm
M lR1 + M rR1
(ii) sum of moments ratio, α CD1 = γ Rd
M So1 + M Su1
212.1 + 47.6
= 1.2 x = 2.05
67 + 85.1
M Sr 1 − M Sl 1 − 44 − 196
(iii) the moment reversal factor, δ1 = = = 0.92
M rR1 + M lR1 47.6 + 212.1
(iv) capacity design requirement, M Sd1,CD = 1 + (α CD,1 − 1)δ1 M Sd1
CD = 1 + (2.05 − 1)0.92 (85.1) = 167.3

o
2π22 2 / 4 + π20 2 / 4
400 × 500
( )
CD = 1 + (2.05 − 1)0.92 (67 ) = 131.7
u
2π22 2 / 4 + π20 2 / 4
400 × 500
( )
u
= 131.7
603
Second Edition
b) For direction '2' of seismic action,

the top of the beam is still in tension
(i) actual beam moment capacity, M lRd = 1 86 x (14.07/13.00) = 201.3 kNm
M rRd = 44.2 x (14.07/13.00) = 47.8 kNm
M lR 2 + M rR 2
(ii) sum of moments ratio, α CD 2 = γ Rd
M So 2 + M Su2
201.3 + 47.8
= 1.2 x = 2.1
80.3 + 61.8
M Sr 2 − M Sl 2 186 + 44.2
(iii) the moment reversal factor, δ 2 = = = 0.92
M rR 2 + M lR 2 201.3 + 47.8
(iv) capacity design requirement, M Sd2,CD = 1 + (α CD , 2 − 1)δ 2 M Sd 2
CD = 1 + (2.1 − 1)0.92 (80.3) = 161.6

o
2π22 2 / 4 + π20 2 / 4
400 × 500
( )
CD = 1 + (2.1 − 1)0.92 (61.8) = 124.3
u
2π22 2 / 4 + π20 2 / 4
400 × 500
( )
u
= 124.3
This capacity check ensures that the plastic hinge will occur in the beams before it occurs in the columns. Hence,
the formation of the plastic hinge in the beam will lead to a stable mechanism of failure. As a result, the column
reinforcements designed from static considerations need not be revised.
604
Second Edition
5.1.6.9.3 Transverse Reinforcement in Columns
As mentioned, only one standard column design is adopted for both internal and external columns. Hence, the
design shear force including considerations of capacity design is the more critical of the two below.
M oRd + M uRd 200.4 + 217.1

(i) Exterior column : VSd,CD = γ Rd = 1.2 × = 167 kN
lc 3
M oRd + M uRd 250.5 + 283.9
(i) Interior column : VSd,CD = γ Rd = 1.2 × = 213.8kN
lc 3
Hence the design shear force is 213.8kN.
Hoop Pattern
Since the maximum distance between adjacent longitudinal bars restrained by hoop bends is 200m for ductility
class ‘M’, a double hoop pattern is used.
Minimum Diameter of Hoops
Minimum diameter of hoops,

dbw = β dbl,max (fyld / fywd)
= 0.35 x 22 x (347.8/191.3)
= 14.0 mm
Maximum Spacing of Hoops
sW = min { bc/3 ; 150mm ; 7dbl }

= min { 340/3 ; 150mm ; 7x22}
= 113 mm
select spacing of 110 mm
Confinement Coefficients
αn = 1−
∑b 2
i
= 1−
4 × 0.159 2 + 4 × 0.209 2
= 0.693
6A 0 6 × 0.44 × 0.34
2 2
 s   110 
α S = 1 − w  = 1 −  = 0.703
 2b 0   2 × 340 
α = α n α S = 0.693 × 0.703 = 0.487
For ductility class ‘M’ columns, the required mechanical ratio of confinement reinforcement is:
1  f yd  
ω Wd ≥ k 0 µ ϕ ν d 
α 
( )
 0.35A g / A c + 0.15 − 0.035

 ES  
ω Wd ≥
1
[60 × 9 × 0.21 × 0.00174 × (0.35 × (0.4 × 0.5) / (0.34 × 0.44) + 0.15) − 0.035] = 0.178
0.487
605
Second Edition
Select hoops of 10 mm diameter at spacing sw. The volumetric ratio is:
ρw =
volume of hoops
=
(2 × 340 + 2 × 440 + 4 × 278) × 79 = 1.411
volume of confined core 340 × 440 × s w sw
( )
ω Wd = ρ w f yd / f cd =
1.411
sw
× (347.8 / 16.7 ) =
29.39
sw
ω Wd ≥ 0.178 ⇒ max imum s w = 29.39 / 0.178 = 165 mm
Thus the hoop spacing is dictated by maximum spacing of hoops above.

So choose φ10@110mm.
Check Maximum Design Force That Can Be Carried Without Crushing of Concrete
VSd = 213.8kN
VRd2 = maximum design force that can be carried without crushing of concrete
VRd2 = 0.5νfcdbw x 0.9d where ν = (0.7-fck/200) = 0.575 ≥ 0.5
VRd2 = 760.5 kN > 213.8kN ⇒ OK, there is no increase of dimensions required.
Check If Shear Reinforcement Is Required
VCD = design shear of a member without shear reinforcement

VCD = [τRdk(1.2+40ρ1)+0.15σcp]bwd
τRd = 0.035fck2/3 = 300kPa
k = 1.6-d = 1.6-0.46 = 1.14
A 10.74
ρ= s = = 0.0061 (≤ 0.02 )
b w d 40 × 44
694
σ cp = = 3470 kN / m 2
0.4 × 0.5
So, VCD = [300 x 1.14 x (1.2 + 40 x 0.0061) + 0.15 x 3470] x 0.4 x 0.5 =202.9 kN (<213.8 kN)
Shear Resistance
The shear resistance is given by the following equation;
Vwd =
A sw
0.9df ywd =
(2 + 1.45)79 × 0.9 × 0.44 × 191.3 = 187.7kN
s 110
Thus VRd = VCD + Vwd = 202.9 + 187.7 = 390.6
Outside Critical Limits
The spacing of the transverse reinforcement should not exceed the lesser of the following three distances:
d) 12 x the minimum diameter of the longitudinal bars = 12 x 20 = 240mm
e) the least dimension of the column = 300mm
f) 300mm
Therefore outside the critical regions the stirrup spacing can be increased to as much as 240 mm.
606
Second Edition
5.1.6.10 Detailing of Beams
5.1.6.10.1 Anchorage Length
The required anchorage length for bars and wires is given by:
Lb,net = αa lb (As,req/As,prov) ≥ lb,min
At the support;
negative reinforcement anchorage length:
Lb,net = 1.0 x (16/4 x (347.8/2.7)) x (14.07/13.0) = 557.7 mm
At the span;
Positive reinforcement anchorage length:
Lb,net = 1.0 x (14/4 x (347.8/2.7)) x (9.24/8.34) = 499.5 mm
5.1.6.10.2 Curtailment of Support Reinforcement
607
Second Edition
5.1.7 Steel Design to EC8 for Earthquake Effects Based on Response Spectrum Analysis
Sufficient local ductility of members or parts of members in compression should be ensured by restricting the
width-thickness ratio b/t according to the cross sectional classes as follows.
Capacity design methodology must be employed.
Connections in dissipative zones should have sufficient over-strength to allow for yielding of the connected parts.
Connections of dissipative parts made by means of butt welds or full penetration welds are deemed to satisfy the
overstrength criterion. For fillet weld connections or bolted connections, the resistance of the connection must be
factored 1.2 times the plastic moment capacity of the connected part. For bolted shear connections bearing failure
should precede shear failure.
Moment resisting frames shall be designed so that plastic hinges form in the beams and not in the columns. This
requirement is waived at the base of the frame, at the top floor of multistorey buildings and for one storey
buildings. The beam to column joints shall have adequate overstrength to allow the plastic hinges to be formed in
the beams.
Concentric braced frames shall be designed, so that yielding of the diagonals in tension will take place before
yielding or buckling of the beams or columns and before failure of the connections.
Eccentric braced frames shall be designed so that beams are able to dissipate energy by the formation of plastic
bending and/or plastic shear mechanisms. The rules are intended to ensure that yielding in the plastic hinges or
shear panels of the beams will take place prior to any yielding or failure elsewhere.
608
Second Edition
5.1.8 Timber Design to EC8 for Earthquake Effects Based on Response Spectrum Analysis
609
Second Edition
5.1.9 Masonry Design to EC8 for Earthquake Effects Based on Response Spectrum Analysis
610
Second Edition
5.1.10 Performance Based Seismic Analysis and Design
Recent damaging earthquakes in the United States (1989 Loma Prieta, 1994 Northridge) and abroad (1995 Kobe,
Japan; 1999 Izmit, Turkey; and 1999 Chi-Chi, Taiwan) have led the public-at-large, public officials (local, state,
and federal), and owners of structures (buildings, bridges, and infrastructure) to question the utility of modern
seismic design codes. Many have argued that a higher level of public safety is required (despite the extremely low
likelihood that an individual will die as a result of earthquake shaking). Partially in response to the damage
wreaked by the Loma Prieta and Northridge earthquakes, the United States Federal Emergency Management
Agency funded studies on performance based earthquake engineering: studies that resulted in FEMA 283 (Moehle
and Whittaker, Eds), FEMA 273 and FEMA 274: two documents that have been replaced by FEMA 356.
When we talk about performance based seismic design, the definition of limit states for seismic design becomes
extremely fundamental. They are defined as follows.
I. Level I Earthquake − Serviceability Limit State (Stiffness)

This limit state is so that cracking of concrete and limited steel yield due to small frequent earthquakes
does not disrupt the function of the structure. Stiffness governs the response of structures in low loads
because strength yet to be reached. Most operations and functions can resume immediately. Repair is
required to restore some non-essential services. Damage is light. Structure is safe for immediate
occupancy. Essential operations are protected.
II. Level II Earthquake − Damage Control Limit State (Strength and Distribution of Strength)
This limit state is so that the damage inflicted on the structure in the form of wide cracks in concrete and
cover spalling and small permanent deformations in steel members due to the design earthquake is
repairable. Strength and its distribution govern the response as elastic limit reached. Damage is
moderate. Selected building systems, features or contents may be protected from damage. Life safety is
generally protected. Structure is damaged but remains stable. Falling hazards remain secure. Repair
possible.
III. Level III Earthquake − Survival Limit State (Ductility)

This limit state is so that the collapse of the structure and loss of life is avoided although heavy irreparable
damage may occur due to the maximum credible earthquake. Ductility governs the response. Structural
collapse is prevented. Nonstructural elements may fall. Repair generally not possible.
Performance based seismic analysis can be performed using the multi-modal response spectrum (with no
behaviour factor) methodology, random response analysis or deterministic transient analysis.
611
Second Edition
5.2 GL, ML Human Footfall Induced Vibrations 12
5.2.1 Limitations
The proposed method does not address the analysis of very lightweight floors (e.g. domestic timber floors) where
the interaction between the person walking on the floor and the floor itself is more complex, and cannot be treated
simply as an applied dynamic load.
5.2.2 Finite Element Mesh and Model Parameters
As with any dynamic response problem, if only the first few resonance frequencies and mode shapes are required,
then a relatively coarse mesh can be used. If higher frequencies are required, then the mesh must be suitably fine to
model the more complicated mode shapes. A good parameter may be the modal mass. We know that the modal
mass of all the bending modes
of a beam (single spanning slab) is half the total beam (single spanning slab) mass if simply supported,
of a beam is quarter the beam mass if a cantilever, and
of a plate is quarter the plate mass if simply supported.
Refer to section 4.1.3.4 for a full explanation of natural frequency and modal mass estimation. When higher modes
deviate from the correct modal mass value, then we know that the mesh cannot capture the mode shape. With more
complicated structures, an h- or p-refinement should be performed and the modal masses of the original and the
refined mesh should be compared; modal masses of higher modes which begin to show discrepancies indicates
the extent of the capability of the mesh in capturing these higher modes. The following modal analyses of a simply
supported 10m UB457x191x98 lumped mass beam model were performed in OASYS/GSA 8.0.15. We shall
describe only the bending modes (not axial). The total mass of the structure is 981.3kg, hence the correct modal
mass is 490.65kg. It is usually recommended that there be 4 elements (or 2n, n integer) for each half sine of mode.
As the number of elements in the odd number models increases, gradually, the modal mass becomes more accurate.
Beam Mesh Natural Frequencies (Hz) Modal Mass (kg) Comment

2 Elements 15.03 490.6
3 Elements 15.14, 55.87 All 654.2 Very poor
4 Elements 15.16, 57.52, 113.3 All 490.6 Good for first mode
5 Elements 15.17, 58.19, 119.9, 179.4 All 542.4 Very Poor
6 Elements 15.17, 58.38, 122.2, 192.7, 249.5 490.6, 654.2, 490.6, 654.2, 490.6 Very Poor
7 Elements 15.17, 58.48, 123.3, 198.5, 269.7, 320.9 All 516.2 Poor
8 Elements 15.17, 58.53, 123.9, 201.6, 280.2, 347.3, 392.6 All 490.6 Good for first 2 modes
With floor problems, because of the high repetition of the structure, there is likelihood that there will be many
modes of similar frequency. Symmetry boundary conditions may be argued, but they will only capture odd bending
modes. Antisymmetric boundary conditions are required for even modes. Combination is quite impractical in
dynamic response studies. Moreover, the symmetric or antisymmetric boundary conditions only capture the
stiffness of the omitted structure and the correct natural frequencies. However, for response calculations, the
omitted structure will result in lower modal masses if nothing else is done, and hence a higher response. Hence, the
mass associated with the truncated portion of the modes have to be lumped onto the boundary to bring the modal
mass up to that of the original model and hence produce the correct response. Because of these unnecessary
complications, a full model is strongly recommended for dynamic analyses.
12
WILLFORD, Michael & YOUNG, Peter. Towards A Consistent Approach of Predicting Footfall-Induced Structural
Vibrations. Advanced Technology Ove Arup & Partners International Ltd., London.
612
Second Edition
Composite floors of concrete slab and steel beams if acting compositely (i.e. has sufficient shear studs for full
composite action) can be modeled with shells for the slab and compatible beam elements for the beams. Offset
elements should be used to model the offset between the elastic neutral axes of the slab and the beams. In these
cases of composite floors, the shell formulation must include in-plane stiffness (on top of bending stiffness). If the
floor has a layer of screed and/or stone finish on top of the concrete slab, the mass and stiffness should be included
and the offset from the elastic neutral axes of the slab + finishing to that of the beam should be used. Connections
between elements should be at their neutral axis. Connections of slabs with offset beams are no different, the elastic
neutral axis should be found and both the beams and the slabs should be offset from their common neutral axis to
connect into column (beam) elements. This is important especially so in linear dynamic problems where an
incorrect connection point will result in incorrect mode shapes.
The recommended dynamic parameters for steel and concrete are as follows.
Material Density (tonnes/m3) Young’s Modulus (kN/m2) Poisson’s Ratio

NW concrete 2.40 38 x 106 0.2
LW concrete 1.88 22 x 106 0.2
Steel 7.84 205 x 106 0.3
The calculation of reinforced concrete section properties can often assume the concrete is uncracked, but the
nominal extreme fibre stresses should be estimated under in-service loads to validate this assumption. Normally the
effect of cracking will be negligible if extreme fibre stresses are less than 2N/mm². The objective is to obtain the
best estimate of the natural frequency, and when cracking is extensive, judgment is required to assess the most
representative section properties to assume. The section properties so derived should be based on dynamic E values
and allow for tension zone stiffening. If it is expected that the concrete may be cracked then a reduced Young’s
modulus should be used. Concrete screeds, when they are present, can be included as contributing to dynamic
stiffness.
At the very low strain levels associated with footfall vibration it can usually be assumed that structural elements are
fully continuous and behave in a fully composite manner unless connections are detailed specifically to prevent this
(e.g. true pin connection, truss supported at top chord only). Normally for strength or serviceability design
structural engineers will assume pinned end connections. For dynamics assume all connections are fixed unless
they truly are pins. This is due to the very small strains involved with dynamics. An external wall or façade can
generally be assumed to offer a continuous line of support to the floor edge. If you have a façade around your
building it may offer vertical support to your floor. Due to the small strains involved with dynamics provide
vertical restraint at façade locations. The same applies around concrete core walls. Columns offer rotational
stiffness to floor beams assuming full continuity as well as vertical support. If modelling a floor plate with pin
supports at column positions the rotational stiffness of the beams can be increased by removing the pin supports
and modelling the columns above and below the floor. The bending stiffness of the columns will help increase the
natural frequency of the floor.
There is also the danger of over restraining. If modelling a floor plate using 2D elements and offset beams, make
sure that the slab edges are not fully restrained against moving laterally (i.e. that it is pinned). Otherwise, this will
result in the slab attracting membrane forces and will give a higher natural frequency than the floor actually has.
The best estimate of the in-service mass should be used. The actual mass of fit-out in a building is often
significantly less than the design allowances, and actual live loads in offices are often only 10% of the design
value, and are negligible on footbridges. Typically the non-structural mass for an office floor can be taken as
100kg/m2. Do NOT apply the full live load as added mass. For stairs and bridges NO live load should be added. It
should be noted that over-estimating the mass can often result in unconservative predictions of dynamic response.
For trapezoidal decking, you may need to modify the density of the 2D elements to take account of the large voids
in trapezoidal decking. It is vital that mass is correctly modeled to calculate the right natural frequencies and modal
masses.
613
Second Edition
Damping values quoted in the literature for floors have often been estimated from heel-drop tests and caution must
be used with these values. The damping so obtained is usually not a true measure of modal damping because
several modes are responding together, and the initial decay of a heel drop includes transfer of energy between
modes as well as dissipation. The apparent damping so obtained is too high.
It has been seen that for composite structures the effective damping tends to decrease as the span increases. This
may be due to the greater size of the steel elements (which have lower intrinsic damping than concrete) relative to
the concrete in longer spans.
For a typical composite office floor or reinforced concrete floor with partitions and raised floors damping of 3% of
critical may be assumed. For a composite floor with no furniture, partitions, raised floors (e.g. airport terminal)
damping may be as low as 1.0% of critical damping.
614
Second Edition
5.2.3 (Non-Crowd or Asynchronous) Human Induced Vertical Footfall Vibrations from Walking
This is evaluated for a single person walking. If several people are walking together, unless they are marching in a
disciplined manner, the footfall rates and phasing will not be coordinated, and hence the response will not increase
in proportion to the number of people. The response due to a single person walking is most when the structure is
empty as to minimize the modal mass and not add additional human damping. It has been observed that the
damping of a structure increases if a large number of people are present on the structure. The human body can be
represented as a dynamic system having two or more main degrees of freedom.
5.2.3.1 Dynamic Response To Vertical Dynamic Forces From Walking on Flat and on Stairs
Depending on the relative frequencies of harmonic excitation and the natural frequencies of the structure, a
different response will be obtained. The following graph shows a 2Hz and a 26Hz floor being excited by 2Hz
walking. There is clear resonant build-up in the first case and clear individual transient response in the second case.
Transient and Resonant Responses
Response
0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 4 4.5 5
Time
5.2.3.1.1 Resonant Excitations For Modes Up To 15Hz (Flat) and 22Hz (Stairs)
+ static response to static loads. However, usually in footfall induced response, it is not the total response which
is of importance, as the criteria is not from a structural safety viewpoint, but rather from a human comfort
viewpoint, the latter of which is measured in terms of acceleration and velocity. Hence, it is sufficient to consider
the fluctuations of the dynamic response. The static response to the mean of the dynamic excitation can be ignored.
Typical single and continuous footfall force time histories are presented. These are inharmonic periodic signals.
615
Second Edition
The first graph shows the Load/(Static Weight) to be greater or less than 1.0, which represents the static weight.
Taking the mean as the static weight, the dynamic load excitation can then be defined with positive and negative
fluctuations as shown on the second graph. It can be seen that the ‘positive’ downward force phase is generally
shorter and of higher magnitude than the negative force phase. Note that the positive and negative here are relative
to the static weight of the person. These time histories can be decomposed into their frequency components by
Fourier Series analysis. The amplitude of the frequency component time histories relative to the static load is called
the dynamic load factor, clearly less than 1.0 because these are the amplitude of the fluctuations about the mean
static weight. The dynamic load factor (not the (magnitude of the) dynamic amplification factor) multiplied by the
static load is hence the amplitude of the dynamic excitation, for a particular harmonic frequency component.
EC5
BS5400
Bear in mind that the total response will then be that of the dynamic response plus the mean of the dynamic
excitations, i.e. the static weight of the person, plus the static response due to the static loads on the structure. As
always done in frequency domain analyses, the mean is applied separately to the dynamic fluctuations. However, in
the case of floor excitations, we are usually only interested in the dynamic acceleration or velocity response and not
the total (static + dynamic) displacement response. These curves show that the footfall time histories can be
decomposed into 4 harmonic components. The Arup DLF curves for walking on flat (floors and footbridges) are
reproduced for clarity.
Dynamic Load Factor For Walking on Flat The DLFs are the magnitudes of the
sinusoidal harmonic components (for
0.60 frequencies at 1, 2, 3 … etc … of the
0.50 walking frequency) derived by Fourier
0.40 Analysis, that when added together, will
DLF
0.30 recreate the original force time history.

0.20
0.10
0.00
0 2 4 6 8 10 12
Forcing Frequency (Hz)
Harmonic 1 Harmonic 2 Harmonic 3 Harmonic 4
616
Second Edition
The Arup DLF curves for walking on stairs are also presented.
Dynamic Load Factor For Walking on Stairs Note that the DLFs for walking on stairs are
greater than for walking on flats. Also, the
1.20 frequency range is higher, i.e. first harmonic
frequency range is up to 4.5Hz for walking
1.00
on stairs compared to 2.8Hz for walking in
0.80 flats.
DLF
0.60
0.40
0.20
0.00
0 5 10 15 20
Forcing Frequency (Hz)
Harmonic 1 Harmonic 2 Harmonic 3 Harmonic 4
Multi-Modal Response Analysis
It is the practice to perform resonant response calculations for single person walking excitations, albeit at the most
critical footfall rate, not necessarily the highest or the lowest footfall rate, but usually that which corresponds to the
natural frequency of the structure. We say usually because the DLF varies. For instance, if we had a stair of
fundamental frequency 2.0Hz, we need to consider the response due to excitation at 2.0Hz to maximize the
dynamic amplification (but at a lower DLF) and also the response at 2.7Hz to consider the maximum DLF, but off-
resonant response, but yet as close to 2.0Hz with maximum DLF. If several people are walking together, unless
they are marching in a disciplined manner, the footfall rates and phasing will not be coordinated, and hence the
response will not increase in proportion to the number of people.
The first harmonic component varies from frequencies of 1Hz to 2.8Hz for walking on flats and from 1Hz to 4.5Hz
for walking on stairs. The DLF versus harmonic excitation frequency curves are very illustrative. Since resonant
vibrations response is far more significant than impulsive response in any field of dynamic excitation, we would
ideally like to avoid any form of resonance. For footfall vibrations, resonance with the first harmonic is clearly
most damaging since the DLF associated with the first harmonic is the largest. Hence if the fundamental vertical
natural frequency of the structure is significantly more than 2.8Hz or 4.5Hz (whichever relevant), the resonance
with the first harmonic is avoided. Similarly, if fundamental vertical natural frequency of the structure is
significantly more than 5.6Hz or 9.0Hz (whichever relevant), the resonance with the second harmonic is avoided.
Finally, if fundamental vertical natural frequency of the structure is significantly more than 8.4Hz or 13.5Hz
(whichever relevant), the resonance with the third harmonic is avoided, although to obtain resonance with the 3rd
617
Second Edition
(or 4th for that matter) harmonic is quite difficult anyway. It should be noted that FOR STAIRS resonance of the
second harmonic has been observed but NOT of the third and higher harmonics, probably because of imprecise
loading. If we were to consider resonance of modes due to 4th harmonic excitations, we would need to consider
modes up to 11.2Hz and 18.0Hz (for walking on flat and stairs respectively). Let us then solve for modes up to
say 15Hz and 22Hz (flat and stair respectively) to also capture the off-resonant responses of modes higher
then 11.2Hz and 18.0Hz.
The calculation procedure is now illustrated. A conventional modal frequency domain analysis is performed. The
equation of motion in the time domain is
[M ]{&
u&( t )} + [C]{u&( t )} + [K ]{u ( t )} = {P( t )}
In the frequency domain we let
{u(t)} = Re al [[Φ ]{ξ(ω)}eiωt ] where {ξ(ω)}is a complex modal displacement response function vector
{P(t)} = Re al [{P(ω)}e iωt ] where {P(ω)}is a harmonic loading function vector
And orthogonalizing the coupled equations, leads to a set of uncoupled equations in the form for a mode i
−ω 2 M i ξ i (ω) + iCi ωξ i (ω) + K i ξ i (ω) = Pi (ω)
Rearranging for the complex modal response (in modal space)
p 0i
ξ i (ω) =
− ω M i + iC i ω + K i
2
p 0i
=
− ω 2 M i + K i + iC i ω
p 0i / K i
=
(1 − ω 2
)
/ ω ni + i(2ζ i ω / ω ni )
2
Instead of the polar form, this can be written in terms of the real and imaginary parts
ξ i (ω) =
p 0i 

(
1 − ω 2 / ω ni
2
−
) (2ζ i ω / ω ni ) 

( ) ( )
i
K i  1 − ω 2 / ω 2 2 + (2ζ ω / ω )2 1 − ω 2
/ ω 2 2
+ (2 ζ ω / ω )2 
 ni i ni ni i ni 
ξ i (ω) = ξ iREAL (ω) − iξ iIMAG (ω)

{u ( t )} = Re al [[Φ ]{ξ REAL (ω) − iξ IMAG (ω)}e iωt ]
{u ( t )} = Re al [[Φ ]{ξ REAL (ω) − iξ IMAG (ω)}(cosωt + isinωt )]
{u ( t )} = [Φ ]{{ξ REAL (ω)}cos ωt + {ξ IMAG (ω)}sin ωt}
 p 01 
 K (D1REAL (ω) cos ωt + D1IMAG (ω) sin ωt ) 
 1 
 ... 
p 
{u ( t )} = [{φ}1 ... {φ}i ... {φ}n ] 0i (D iREAL (ω) cos ωt + D iIMAG (ω) sin ωt ) 
 iK 
 ... 
 p 0n (D 
K nREAL (ω) cos ωt + D nIMAG (ω) sin ωt )
 n 
618
Second Edition
where
D iREAL (ω) =
(1 − ω / ω )
2
ni
2
(1 − ω 2
/ ω ) + (2ζ ω / ω
ni
2 2
i ni )2
D iIMAG (ω) =
(2ζ i ω / ω ni )
(1 − ω2 / ωni 2 )2 + (2ζ i ω / ωni )2
Since MAX (Acosωt + Bsinωt) = (A2+B2)½, at a particular DOF j, the steady state displacement response will be
2 2
 n
p 0i   n
p 0i 
Steady − State Response, u jMAX = 

∑
i Ki
φ ij D iREAL (ω)  + 
 
∑
i Ki
φ ij D iIMAG (ω) 

The expression for acceleration can be obtained simply by differentiating the displacement expression twice w.r.t.
time. Hence there will be a multiple of the square of the excitation frequency, ω2.
The above expression is exact for excitations at a certain point long enough for steady-state conditions to be
achieved. In practice of course, the number of footfalls are limited (a pedestrian is only effective in generating
resonant response when walking along a single half sine wave of the mode shape; as he moves on to the next,
out of phase half sine wave he begins to cancel out the vibration he has just generated) and not all these
footfalls are applied at the same mode-shape point (many of the steps will have been towards the edge or the
less active part of the half sine and would have been less effective in generating response). Hence, only a
proportion of the maximum possible steady-state is the achieved. The maximum proportion of steady-state
response for crossing a sinusoidal mode shape can be estimated as
where N is approximately 0.55 of the total number of vibration cycles occurring as the span is crossed. The total
number of cycles for first harmonic loading is the span distance L divided by the stride length l, and for higher
harmonics this number of cycles is multiplied by the harmonic number n. This expression for r is best applied
ONLY to the imaginary parts in this procedure.
It is also noted that the harmonic components of the footfall forcing function are not in phase. The actual phases of
these harmonic components vary considerably between different persons and walking speeds. There is therefore no
general relationship of phases that can be used to generate a unique time history. Hence it is recommended that the
maximum response amplitude be estimated by means of the SRSS combination of the individual responses of each
harmonic.
The peak acceleration can be compared to peak acceleration acceptability criteria in the 1/3 octave bands.
Alternatively, the RMS acceleration response is derived from the maximum response (by dividing by √2 since
simple harmonic motion) and comparison to the RMS acceptability criteria in the 1/3 octave bands is made.
Let us illustrate the resonant response calculation for ALL modes exactly for the response at ONE node due to
excitation at ONE harmonic frequency, say 5.14Hz (corresponding to the second harmonic of a walking frequency
of 2.57Hz). This harmonic frequency corresponds to the first mode. Hence the first mode resonates whilst the rest
of the modes present off-resonant response.
Mode Natural Frequency, fn (Hz) Excitation Frequency, f (Hz) f/fn Modal Damping DiREAL DiIMAG
1 5.14 5.14 1.00 0.03 0.000 16.667
2 5.39 5.14 0.95 0.03 7.890 4.982
3 6.30 5.14 0.82 0.03 2.928 0.429
4 8.28 5.14 0.62 0.03 1.621 0.098
619
Second Edition
Say that the excitation node and response node is the same and corresponds to unity modal displacement for mode
1. The amplitude of the modal force for mode 1 is thus, p01 = 1.0 x DLF x 700N = 1.0 x 0.098 x 700 = 68.5N.
Modal Displacement at Modal Force Amplitude, Modal Displacement at φr(p0i/M). φr(p0i/M).

2 2
Modal Mass Excitation Node, φe p0i = 68.5φe Response Node, φr (f/fn) .DiREAL (f/fn) .DiIMAG
29551 1.000 68.500 1.000 0.00000 0.03863
29551 0.953 65.260 0.953 0.01510 0.00953
29551 0.816 55.899 0.816 0.00301 0.00044
29551 0.621 42.552 0.621 0.00056 0.00003
0.01866 0.04864
The steady-state response is then (0.018662 + 0.048642)1/2 = 0.0521ms-2. Assuming a stride length of 0.75m the
number of steps to cross the span is 16, resulting in 32 cycles of vibration at the 2nd harmonic frequency. The
proportion of steady state response for 3% damping is then obtained, r = 1-e-2π0.03N = 0.96 where N = 0.55x32 =
17.6. Hence the corrected steady-state response is 0.96 x 0.0521 = 0.050ms-2. And thus the response factor, R =
0.050/0.007 = 7.1.
The peak acceleration responses at A NODE due to excitation at A NODE (not necessarily but usually the same
node), for ALL harmonic forcing frequencies (from walking on flat) can be presented as follows. The graph shows
that the maximum response occurs due to the second harmonic at 5.2Hz. There is clearly a significant (to the
response at THIS NODE) natural mode at this frequency. There are also natural modes at 6.3Hz and 7.1Hz, but the
maximum response comes from the second harmonic, which has a larger DLF. Notice that the first harmonic,
which has the greatest DLF, does not peak because there is no significant natural mode within the frequency range
of the first harmonic.
Individual Harmonic Peak Acceleration At A Node

For All (Flat) Harmonic Frequencies
1.6 Resonance of second harmonic excitation

with natural frequency at 5.2Hz.
1.4
Peak Acceleration (%g)
1.2 Harmonic 1
1.0 Harmonic 2
Harmonic 3
0.8
Harmonic 4
0.6
0.4
0.2
0.0
1 3 5 7 9 11 13
Harmonic Forcing Frequency (Hz)
The response at A NODE due to excitation at A NODE can also be presented in terms of the walking frequency i.e.
the frequency of the first harmonic. The former graph is more illustrative as it shows the response in terms of the
individual harmonic frequencies, not just the first harmonic (i.e. walking frequency).
620
Second Edition
Individual Harmonic Response Factor At A Node

For All (Flat) Walking Frequencies Resonance of second harmonic excitation
with natural frequency at 5.2Hz.
1.8
1.6
1.4
Harmonic 1
Response Factor
1.2 Harmonic 2
1.0 Harmonic 3
0.8 Harmonic 4
0.6 Total Response Factor
0.4
0.2
0.0
1 1.5 2 2.5 3
Walking Frequency (Hz)
The MAXIMUM response at EACH AND EVERY NODE giving consideration to ALL the harmonics altogether
can be computed and presented as follows.
621
Second Edition
Fundamental Mode Response Analysis – Hand Calculation
A single fundamental mode response usually provides good approximations to the maximum response because of
the fact that different modes are out of phase with each other, their maximums at a point not occurring at the same
time. Hence, for a floor plate, the maximum response in the middle of the plate is usually governed just by the
fundamental mode. Higher modes have higher natural frequencies and hence the modal stiffness will be larger,
resulting in a lower modal response. This approximation begins to fall apart when there are modes closely spaced,
in which case the multi-modal approach should be used. The multi-modal approach should also be used if the
response due to the first harmonic exciting a mode and higher harmonics exciting another mode is required. Of
course, the multi-modal approach also considers multiple modes (albeit most of them contributing off-resonant
response).
To ascertain the most significant mode for the response to excitation at a particular node, scroll (visually or
numerically) through all modes and pick out the modes with the greatest displacement value at that node. This
gives the modes with the highest modal force. Of these, mode with the lowest modal mass will obviously yield the
highest response. Hence, pick out the mode with the lowest modal mass (by FE computation or otherwise) or by
visual inspection knowing that modes that mobilize more of the structure will be have a larger modal mass
associated with it.
Because we need not consider the phase information (since no mode combinations are required), we do not need to
express the dynamic amplification in terms of its real and imaginary parts. Instead, we consider the magnitude of
the dynamic amplification function straight away. This gives the steady-state (i.e. peak) acceleration response in
physical coordinates as
p0 1
a peak = φ response φ excitation ω2
ω ni M i (1 − ω )
2
+ (2ζ i ω / ω ni )
2 2
/ ω ni
2 2
And at resonance (ω = ωni),
p0 1
a peak = φ response φ excitation
M i 2ζ i
Inculcating the proportion of steady-state response achievable for crossing span
p0 1 L
a peak = φ response φ excitation r where r = 1 − e −2 πζN , N = 0.55n
M i 2ζ i λ
For the maximum (peak) response with excitation at the maximum point of the mode shape and the weight of a
person as 70kg (about 700N),
700 x DLF 1 L
a peak = (1.0)(1.0)r where r = 1 − e −2 πζN , N = 0.55n
Mi 2ζ i λ
where the DLF corresponds to the excitation frequency equal (as resonance response intended) to the natural
frequency of the mode under consideration.
The peak acceleration can be compared to peak acceleration acceptability criteria in the 1/3 octave bands.
Alternatively, the RMS acceleration response is derived from the maximum response (by dividing by √2 since
simple harmonic motion) and comparison to the RMS acceptability criteria in the 1/3 octave bands is made. Hence,
if the excitation is between 4Hz < fharmonic excitation < 8Hz, then
a peak a RMS a peak / 2 a peak
Re sponse Factor = or Re sponse Factor = = =
0.007 0.005 0.005 0.007
622
Second Edition
5.2.3.1.2 Transient Excitations For Modes Above 15Hz (Flat) and 22Hz (Stairs)
However, usually in footfall induced response, it is not the total response which is of importance, as the criteria is
not from a structural safety viewpoint, but rather from a human comfort viewpoint, the latter of which is measured
in terms of acceleration and velocity. Hence, it is sufficient to consider dynamic response due to the impulse
excitations. This ignores the static response to static loads such as that of the floor, but does inherently include the
static response to the mean of the dynamic excitation (unlike the frequency domain approach).
Typical single footfall force time histories are presented.
Multi-Modal Response Analysis
Where resonance excitations cannot occur, the response will be governed by an impulsive type response, i.e. the
starting transient response will be more significant than the steady-state response (or that during the build up of the
steady-state response), giving a much lower dependency of response on the exact frequency and on damping.
The calculation procedure is illustrated. The dynamic equation of motion in the time domain is
[M ]{&
u&( t )} + [C]{u&( t )} + [K ]{u ( t )} = {P( t )}
Orthogonalizing the coupled equations, leads to a set of uncoupled equations in the form for a mode i
Mi &
On rearranging, the modal response in modal coordinates ξi
p 0i p
ξ i (t ) = D i (t ) = D i ( t ) 2 0i
Ki ω ni M i
Finally, the response in physical coordinates ui(t) are
{u(t)} = [Φ ]{ξ( t )}
623
Second Edition
In the case where the excitation is impulsive (t1/T < ~0.2), the maximum modal displacement response will be
1 τ= t
ξ i max =
M i ω ni ∫τ =0
Response formula becomes
1 τ= t less valid for higher modes of
ξ i max =
M i ωdi ∫τ =0
φ i p(τ)dτ damped vibration as t1/Ti > ~0.2
And, the displacement response in physical coordinates ui(t) are

{u(t)} = [Φ ]{ξ( t )}
In time domain analyses the maxima of the modal responses in physical space do not occur at the same time.
Hence, the exact procedure would be to write the total response in physical space as above and only then maximize
the function. If however the modal responses were to be maximized, then some sort of combination technique such
as the SRSS or CQC should be employed.
For impulsive excitation though, the maximum response occurs at the first cycle of ensuing vibration after impact.
The phase difference between modes is quite insignificant as it takes time for damping to affect the phase between
the modes. Hence the maximum response can be approximated as a simple summation of the maximum response of
the individual modes.
For response due to impulsive type excitations, only one footfall excitation is required as the maximum occurs at
the very first cycle. The ensuing vibration is the unforced vibration of the structure at its damped natural
frequencies. Hence the maximum (peak) modal velocity response is obtained (by differentiating w.r.t time)
1 τ= t
ξ&i max = ∫
φ i p(τ)dτ
M i τ =0
For flats, the value of the (empirical) effective impulse, Ieffective (with 25% exceedance probability) can be taken as
τ= t f 1.43
I effective = ∫
τ= 0
φ i p(τ)dτ = φ i 54
f n1.30
Ns
where f is the excitation frequency and fn the natural frequency.
For stairs, the value of the (empirical) effective impulse, Ieffective can be taken as
τ= t 150
I effective =∫τ =0
φ i p(τ)dτ = φ i
fn
Ns
And, the velocity response in physical coordinates are

{u&(t)} = [Φ ]{ξ&( t )}
The maximum (peak) velocity response is approximated by the simple addition of the maximum individual modal
velocity responses, although this is not strictly correct. With modal methods, the quantity for every mode (be it the
displacement, velocity, acceleration, stress or force) must be combined before being maximized. Note that you can
derive the velocity and acceleration for every mode to be combined, and not just the displacement. But the fact
remains that the maximizing must be performed after modal combination. But because we are assuming that all
modes are responding in an impulsive nature (although clearly this assumption is NOT TRUE for higher modes of
vibration) we shall maximize the response of individual modes before combination, because we are assuming that
the phase difference between modes to be insignificant for the reason outlined above (that all modes response in an
impulsive nature) and that damping is not prominent to affect the phase in the first cycle.
Alternatively, the correct method of modal combination should be used. Here the different modal responses in the
physical coordinates are combined before maximizing the function, which is as follows.
624
Second Edition
N
u&( t ) = ∑ φ ξ&e
i =1
i i
− ζ i ωni t
sin ω di t
The peak velocity CANNOT be compared to peak velocity acceptability criteria because the response is
characterized by a series of decaying transient vibrations and hence the peak velocity is unrepresentative in
perceptibility terms. An effective peak value of √2 times the RMQ velocity response in the 1/3 octave bands can be
used in comparison to the peak velocity acceptability in the 1/3 octave bands. Alternatively, the RMS or RMQ
velocity response in the 1/3 octave bands can be compared to the RMS or RMQ velocity acceptability criteria in the
1/3 octave bands.
Fundamental Mode Response Analysis – Hand Calculation
For a fundamental mode response analyses, the maximum (peak) velocity response is given by
I
v peak = φ response effective
Mi
For flats, the value of the (empirical) effective impulse, Ieffective (with 25% exceedance probability) can be taken as
τ= t f 1.43
I effective = ∫ τ =0
φ i p(τ)dτ = φ excitation 54
f n1.30
Ns
where f is the excitation frequency and fn the natural frequency.
For stairs, the value of the (empirical) effective impulse, Ieffective can be taken as
τ= t 150
I effective = ∫
τ =0
φ i p(τ)dτ = φ excitation
fn
Ns
The peak velocity CANNOT be compared to peak velocity acceptability criteria because the response is
characterized by a series of decaying transient vibrations and hence the peak velocity is unrepresentative in
perceptibility terms. An effective peak value of √2 times the RMQ velocity response in the 1/3 octave bands can be
used in comparison to the peak velocity acceptability in the 1/3 octave bands. Alternatively, the RMS or RMQ
velocity response in the 1/3 octave bands can be compared to the RMS or RMQ velocity acceptability criteria in the
1/3 octave bands. The approximate equivalent RMS velocity response is
2 v peak
v RMS =
3 2
Hence, if the excitation is fharmonic excitation > 8Hz, then
v a 2πfv RMS
Re sponse Factor = RMS or Re sponse Factor = RMS =
0.0001 ~ 0.005 ~ 0.005
Expanding the former expression,
v 1 2 v peak
Re sponse Factor = RMS = ≈ 4700 v peak
0.0001 0.0001 3 2
625
Second Edition
5.2.3.2 Serviceability Acceptance Criteria
The perceptibility and then acceptance criteria can be established in terms of peak, RMS or RMQ of a signal. RMQ
has been shown to be the most reliable parameter. BS6472:1994 states the threshold of human perception in terms
of the baseline RMS vertical acceleration versus vibration frequency.
BS5400
70
EC5 Bachmann
20
proportional to velocity
1
proportional to acceleration
Between 4 and 8Hz, the baseline RMS acceleration is 0.005ms-2 corresponding to a baseline peak
acceleration (for steady state signals) of 0.007ms-2. The rising acceleration criteria for frequencies above 8Hz
correspond to a constant RMS velocity of 0.0001ms-1. The so-called Response Factor is the number of multiples
the response acceleration or velocity is that of this baseline.
Structure Acceptable Response Factor

Hospital Floor 1
Special Office Floor 4
Normal Office Floor 8
Busy Office Floor 12
Heavy Public Stairs 24
Light Office Stairs 32
Very Light Escape Stairs 64
External Footbridge 50+
Increasingly over the last thirty years vibration-sensitive equipment has been used within research laboratories and
production facilities in the fields of microelectronics, opto-electronics, metrology, biotechnology and medicine.
Vibration levels far below human perception thresholds are normally required for these facilities, because vibration
at the equipment support points can cause internal components, study specimens, or items being produced, to move
relative to each other. Therefore, these facilities call for close attention to vibrations, particularly on suspended
floor structures. For example, a typical semiconductor production facility might have for its 5,000m2 clean room a
1m deep concrete grillage floor supported on columns spaced at 4m x 4m. A medical laboratory floor, which might
626
Second Edition
have vibration requirements an order of magnitude less stringent, might be designed with conventional
slab/deck/steel-framing schemes similar to, but significantly stiffer and heavier than conventional office building
framing. General vibration criteria as measured in one-third octave bands of frequency over the frequency range 8
to 100 Hz for laboratories are as follows.
627
Second Edition
5.2.3.3 Practical Solutions
Flats or stairs that have fundamental frequency falling near that of the first harmonic are completely unsuitable for
service.
With stairs, if the stiffness of the stringers can be increased by having deeper beam sections or by tying the
stringers together, then the natural frequencies of the stair would increase, hence making it less susceptible to
human induced footfall vibrations. Another solution would be to have greater mass by incorporating heavier treads
or by using glass along the hand railings, hence reducing the modal response, although of course the natural
frequencies may decrease too much as to make it again susceptible to footfall excitation frequencies. Alterations to
the boundary conditions can also be recommended at times to increase the natural frequencies of the stair, for
instance by making the extremities of the stair encastre or if possible by breaking the span with a column, a beam
or a hanger. As a last resort, a TMD would have to be designed and installed if all other solutions prove
unacceptable to the architects.
On floor vibration problems, the uniformity of the floor between adjacent bays will help lower the response. This is
because the more uniform the bays are, the greater the contribution of the mass from adjacent bays into the modal
mass of a particular mode. Of course, the higher the modal mass of a particular mode, the smaller will be the
response. To illustrate this, consider two adjacent bays, one much stiffer than the other, here by virtue of the shorter
length. Clearly, because of the small components of the eigenvector in the stiff bay, its contribution to the modal
mass will be minimal. On the other hand, if the bays were of similar stiffness, the eigenvector will be more uniform
and there will be a greater contribution to the modal mass from both bays.
1.0 1.0
1.0
Another case is bays that are adjacent to holes or isolated bays. The modal mass is provided by the mass only in
that bay. No contribution from adjacent bays. The modal mass is thus low and the mode becomes a local mode.
This is akin to a bridge really. Thus, the response can be high.
Stiffness, mass and damping are the three parameters that the designer can vary to improve the dynamic
performance of a floor when the basic geometry has been fixed. The true implications of making changes can only
be assessed if there is proper understanding that it is a dynamic problem under consideration, with acceleration (not
deflection) usually the quantity of concern. The way in which footfall force vary with frequency must also be
properly appreciated. Whilst there is a decrease in footfall forces as the harmonic number increases, there is also an
increase in footfall force with increasing walking speed within each harmonic, especially for the first harmonic. It
is not therefore always advantageous to increase the natural frequency of a floor to reduce accelerations. Unless
increasing the natural frequency takes it out of the range of susceptibility to a particular harmonic, the increase in
frequency may be counter-productive. There is a strong case for saying that a floor of 3.0 to 3.6Hz natural
frequency has a lower likelihood of excessive vibration than one of 3.6 to 4.4Hz. Both ranges are susceptible to the
2nd harmonic of footfall forces, but the forces are lower for the lower walking speeds that would excite the lower
frequency range.
Increasing the damping is always beneficial, but cannot currently be done inexpensively. Increasing the mass is
also always beneficial, unless by so doing the natural frequency is reduced below a threshold that makes the floor
susceptible to a lower harmonic of footfall force. Increasing the stiffness is not always beneficial; as noted above,
increasing the natural frequency can render a floor susceptible to higher footfall forces from faster walking rates.
Additional stiffness which takes the natural frequency above one of the thresholds is however beneficial.
Experience has shown that if responses as high as R=8 are measured in offices there is occasional adverse
comment, particularly if these levels are reached regularly, and lower targets (R=4-6) are recommended as
necessary to remove the likelihood of such comment.
628
Second Edition
5.2.4 (Non-Crowd or Asynchronous) Human Induced Vertical Footfall Vibrations from Sports in Halls 13
+ static response to static loads. However, usually in footfall induced response, it is not the total response which
is of importance, as the criteria is not from a structural safety viewpoint, but rather from a human comfort
viewpoint, the latter of which is measured in terms of acceleration and velocity. Hence, it is sufficient to consider
the fluctuations of the dynamic response.
The established dynamic response calculation theories for walking on flats and stairs are generally equally
applicable to predicting (single person) induced vibrations due to sports in halls. Certain terms such as the
maximum proportion of steady-state response for crossing a sinusoidal mode shape
where N is approximately 0.55 of the total number of vibration cycles occurring as the span is crossed may or may
not be applicable as the excitation may be assumed located at the same spot, as the critical consideration.
The DLFs for the different activities are presented as follows according to Bachmann.
Activity Activity Rate (Hz) 1st Harmonic DLF 2nd Harmonic DLF 3rd Harmonic DLF
Running 2.0Hz to 3.0Hz 1.6 0.7 0.2
Jumping Normal 2.0Hz 1.8 1.3 0.7
Normal 3.0Hz 1.7 1.1 0.5
High 2.0Hz 1.9 1.6 1.1
High 3.0Hz 1.8 1.3 0.8
Standing 0.6Hz DLF½ = 0.5
For a single mode, the maximum (peak) resonant response with excitation at the maximum point of the mode shape
and the weight of a person as 70kg (about 700N), the peak acceleration is
700 x DLF 1
a peak = (1.0)(1.0)
Mi 2ζ i
where the DLF corresponds to the excitation frequency equal (as resonance response intended) to the natural
frequency of the mode under consideration.
If the excitation is between 4Hz < fharmonic excitation < 8Hz, then
a peak
Re sponse Factor =
0.007
Peak acceleration criteria is normally in the range of 0.05g to 0.1g. However, lower values may be required for
adjacent floor areas housing different quieter occupancies to which vibration may be transmitted.
13
BACHMANN, Hugo. Vibration Problems in Structures Practical Guidelines. Birkhauser, Berlin, 1995.
629
Second Edition
5.2.5 Crowd Induced (Synchronous) Vertical Footfall Vibrations for Gymnasium Floors, Dance Floors,
Stadium Tiers, Theatre Tiers and Balconies 14
This concerns excessive vibrations caused by groups of people dancing or jumping in unison. The vibrations may
cause excessive motion resulting in panic, failure of non-structural components or in the most severe case, low
cycle fatigue failure. We shall focus on whole body jumping since this result in the highest loadings and will be
critical for most designs. Unlike the single person walking or running excitation, crowd induced vibrations differ in
the sense that the loading is applied at the same location and also in the fact that the excitation is applied over a
large spatial area simultaneously, i.e. crowd loading and not single human footfall loading.
+ static response to static loads. Clearly only the fluctuations of the dynamic excitation is required to predict the
response accelerations and velocity to meet the human comfort criteria, but when an evaluation of the structural
integrity is required, the dynamic response must be supplemented by the mean of the dynamic excitations, i.e. the
static weight of the people, and also the static response due to the static loads on the structure.
If the natural frequency of a structure is significantly above the frequency at which repeated dynamic forces can be
applied, then excessive vibration is unlikely to arise. Therefore the simplest form of check on the adequacy of a
structure is to ensure that its natural frequencies are higher than the maximum frequency of effective excitation. If a
minimum natural frequency of the structure is above the target value, then no further check is required. If natural
frequencies are below the minimum target value, then the actual response of the structure has to be estimated; this
is a more detailed and uncertain calculation. BS6399 Part 1: 1996 requires the dynamic response of structures with
natural frequencies below 8.4Hz in the vertical direction and 4.0Hz in the horizontal direction to be considered
explicitly. For stands occupied during pop concerts, the suggested minimum vertical frequency is intended to
ensure that the second harmonic of jumping excitation is out of the frequency range. The following values are
proposed in the literature.
IStructE Guide 6.0Hz
Bachmann and Ammann 7.5Hz
CEB 6.5 – 7.5Hz
NBCC (varies with mass of structure) 6.5Hz (typical)
There is also the question of whether the natural frequency should be calculated with the mass of the audience on
the stand. The IStructE Guide suggests the unloaded frequency can be used but the NBCC suggests the weight of
participants should be included. Ellis and Ji have observed that the mass of stationary people should be included,
but that members of the audience engaged in jumping provide dynamic force only and do not contribute mass that
would lead to a reduction in frequency.
There is very little guidance in the literature for swaying. Isolated measurements indicate that typical frequencies
lie below 1.5Hz. International guidance of Bachmann and CEB suggest lateral frequencies should be above 2.5Hz;
however, for a large crowd we assume that the effect of the second harmonic is negligible, and the minimum
natural frequency should be above 1.5Hz. The IStructE does not specify a minimum natural frequency, but requires
the strength of the stand to be checked for a lateral load of 7.5% of the weight of the audience, with appropriate
imposed partial load factor. In a very large crowd, some reduction of DLF is expected, particularly in the higher
harmonics. In addition, it becomes difficult for a large crowd to synchronize at jumping frequencies above 2.8Hz
and the National Building Code of Canada suggests that the highest jumping rate to be considered is 2.75Hz. A
recent survey by Ji shows that almost all songs played have beat rates below 2.8Hz. The DLFs for the different
activities are presented as follows according to Bachmann.
14
WILFORD, Michael. An Investigation into Crowd-Induced Vertical Dynamic Loads Using Available Measurements. Ove
Arup and Partners International Ltd., 2003.
630
Second Edition
Activity Activity Rate (Hz) 1st Harmonic DLF 2nd Harmonic DLF 3rd Harmonic DLF
Jumping Normal 2.0Hz 1.8 1.3 0.7
Normal 3.0Hz 1.7 1.1 0.5
High 2.0Hz 1.9 1.6 1.1
High 3.0Hz 1.8 1.3 0.8
Dancing 2.0Hz to 3.0Hz 0.50 0.15 0.10
Hand clapping with body 1.6Hz 0.17 0.10 0.04
bouncing while standing 2.4Hz 0.38 0.12 0.02
Hand clapping Normal 1.6Hz 0.024 0.010 0.009
Normal 2.4Hz 0.047 0.024 0.015
Intensive 2.0Hz 0.170 0.047 0.037
Lateral Body Swaying Seated 0.6Hz DLF½ = 0.4
Standing 0.6Hz DLF½ = 0.5
Other guides give the following DLF values.
Activity First Harmonic Second Harmonic Third Harmonic

NBCC Dancing 0.50 (1.5 – 3Hz) 0.050 (3 – 6 Hz) -----
NBCC Lively concert or sport event 0.40 (1.5 – 3Hz) 0.150 (3 – 6Hz) ----
NBCC Jumping/Aerobics 1.50 (1 – 2.75 Hz) 0.600 (2 – 5.5 Hz) 0.10 (3 – 8.25 Hz)
CEB 209 Dancing 0.50 (2 – 3 Hz) 0.150 (4 – 6 Hz) 0.10 (6 – 9 Hz)
CEB 209 Hand Clapping with body bouncing 0.37 0.120 0.04
while standing (2.4 Hz)
Horizontal: Front to Back 0.05 (1 –1.5 Hz) 0.040 (1.5 – 3 Hz) Not critical
Horizontal: Side to Side 0.25 (1 –1.5 Hz) 0.035 (1.5 – 3 Hz) Not critical
Willford (2003) proposed the following vertical DLFs (for jumping at pop concerts) and lateral DLFs.
Excitation Frequency (Hz) Vertical Dynamic Load Coefficient of Variation

Factor (DLF)
1.5 to 3.0 1.50 0.15
3.0 to 6.0 0.60 0.60
6.0 to 9.0 0.10 1.00
Excitation Frequency (Hz) Lateral (Front to Back) Lateral (Side to Side)
Dynamic Load Factor (DLF) Dynamic Load Factor (DLF)
1.0 to 1.5 0.05 0.250
1.5 to 3.0 0.04 0.035
3.0 to 4.5 Not critical Not critical
A forced frequency response analysis SOL 108 or SOL 111 should be carried out in MSC.NASTRAN with all
nodes representing the excitations of individual people be incorporated simultaneously within one analysis. Each
person induces an excitation in phase with each other, as the most critical case. Hence only one RLOAD entry is
required whilst the DAREA card points to all the nodes where a single person may be jumping. This hence models
the crowd induced loading and includes exactly the phase difference between the natural modes. This can be used
to evaluate exactly the steady-state acceleration response, steady-state displacement response and the steady-state
stress and force quantities for structural integrity.
631
Second Edition
As hand verification, a single modal response analysis may be performed. The modal frequency and modal mass
can be obtained from a real modal analysis whilst the damping can be ascertained from a complex modal analysis
or from measured data. Then, the modal force can be ascertained from
Modal Force = ∫ φ (Ω){P(Ω, t)}dΩ

Ω
i
Amplitude of mod al force, p 0i = ∫ φ (Ω) x DLF x Static Load dΩ

Ω
i
The steady-state (i.e. peak) single mode acceleration response can then be estimated in physical coordinates as
p0 1
a peak = φ response ω2
ωni M i (1 − ω )
2
+ (2ζ i ω / ωni )
2 2
/ ωni
2 2
The following vibration acceptance criteria are proposed for severe dynamic loading cases. These are based on
vertical limits proposed by Kasperski (1996) and on the relative sensitivity of humans to lateral and vertical
vibration from ISO 2631.
Vertical modes: peak acceleration to be less than 18% to 35%g

maximum vertical deflection amplitude 10mm.
Horizontal modes: peak acceleration to be less than 6% to 12%g
The lower numbers are reasonable design targets. Exceedance of the higher values (35%g vertically and 12%g
horizontally) could lead to panic.
It may also be prudent to evaluate the steady-state single mode displacement response and hence the steady-
state single mode stress or force response within the structure to determine the structural integrity of the
structure. Note that the dynamic response must be supplemented by the mean of the dynamic excitations, i.e. the
static weight of the people, and also the static response due to the static loads on the structure.
p0 1
u peak = φ response
ω ni M i (1 − ω )
2
2
/ ω ni 2 2
+ (2ζ i ω / ω ni )2
632
Second Edition
5.2.6 Crowd Induced (Synchronous) Lateral Vibrations 15
Adequate dynamic performance of a bridge requires that

I. the lowest lateral natural frequency should be above about 1.5Hz, or
II. there must be sufficient damping present such that synchronous lateral excitation does not occur
for the crowd densities expected on the bridge. Damping ratio for stability must be
The most famous instance of synchronous lateral excitation occurred on the

London Millennium Bridge. The bridge structural diagram is that of a
shallow suspension bridge, where the cables are as much as possible below
the level of the bridge deck to free the views from the deck. Two groups of
four 120mm diameter locked coil cables span from bank to bank over two
river piers. The lengths of the three spans are 81m for the north span,144m
for the main span between the piers and 108m for the south span. The sag of
the cable profile is 2.3m in the main span, around six times shallower than a
more conventional suspension bridge structure. The tension in the cable is
22.5MN from the dead load.
It is estimated that between 80 000 and 100 000 people crossed the bridge during the first day. Analysis of video
footage showed a maximum of 2000 people on the deck at any one time, resulting in a maximum density of
between 1.3 and 1.5 people per square meter. Unexpected excessive lateral vibrations of the bridge occurred. The
movements took place mainly on the south span, at a frequency of around 0.8Hz (the first south lateral mode), and
on the central span, at frequencies of just under 0.5Hz and 1.0Hz (the first and second lateral modes respectively).
More rarely, movement occurred on the north span at a frequency of just over 1.0Hz (the first north lateral mode).
Excessive vibration did not occur continuously, but built up when a large number of pedestrians were on the
affected spans of the bridge and died down if the number of people on the bridge reduced, or if the people stopped
walking. From visual estimation of the amplitude of the movements on the south and central span, the maximum
lateral acceleration experienced on the bridge was between 200 and 250 milli-g .At this level of acceleration a
significant number of pedestrians began to have difficulty in walking and held onto the balustrades for support. No
excessive vertical vibration was observed.
The tests on the Millennium Bridge showed that the lateral force generated by pedestrians is approximately
proportional to the response of the bridge. The correlated force per person can be related to the local velocity Vlocal
using a lateral walking force coefficient k as kVlocal. The tests indicated the value of k to be approximately 300Ns/m
over the frequency range 0.5 to 1.0 Hz.
The ith person’s contribution to the modal force is φi kVlocal. Now the local velocity is related to the modal
(response) velocity by Vlocal = φi V. Hence the ith person’s contribution to the modal force is φi k φi V = φi2 kV.
Hence the modal excitation force generated by N people on the span is
Since the lateral excitation force is proportional of the bridge response, there is a damping requirement for
stability. The damping force must exceed the excitation force. The modal damping force is 2ωcMV. Thus if the
modal damping force is to exceed the modal excitation force
15
DALLARD, FITZPATRICK, FLINT, LE BOURVA, LOW, RIDSDILL SMITH, WILLFORD. The London Millennium
Footbridge. The Structural Engineer Journal Volume 79 / No. 22, Institution of Structural Engineers, London, November 2001.
633
Second Edition
Rearranging and converting to frequency in Hz, the required damping for stability is
This can be evaluated if the mode shape and the distribution of pedestrians is known. Assuming the people are
uniformly distributed over the whole span, the number of people in the length dL is
The summation can be approximated by the continuous integral
Assuming the mode shape is sinusoidal and normalized to unity
Hence the damping ratio required for stability

c here is the damping ratio, ζ
not the damping constant
Conversely, for a specified amount of damping, the limited number of people to avoid instability is
This formula has been derived assuming the pedestrians are uniformly distributed over the whole span and the
mode shape is sinusoidal and has been normalized to unity.
To estimate the response, the amplitude related correlated excitation can be made equivalent to a negative damping.
Damping is proportional to velocity, hence since the excitation is also proportional to the response velocity, it can
be equated to a negative damping having a damping ratio
The negative damping varies linearly with N. At NL the negative damping equals the actual damping, making the
effective damping zero. The effective damping is
Finally, the steady-state displacement amplitude of response at resonance is approximately 1/2ceff.
634
Second Edition
Knowing the density of people expected on the bridge, the number of people N can be calculated by multiplying
the density with the area of the deck. The Millennium Bridge was modified to ensure stability for a crowd density
of 2.0 people / m2. Although tests indicate that normal walking becomes difficult at densities above about 1.7
people / m2. Designing for this extreme density means the bridge should always have significant positive damping,
such that the response will remain comfortable. The pedestrian test results support this approach. Although lateral
vibrations occurred from the onset, increasing with pedestrian numbers, the acceleration amplitudes remained
acceptably small provided the number of pedestrians was less than NL by a suitable margin.
Unless the usage of the bridge was to be greatly restricted, only two generic options to improve its performance
were considered feasible. The first was to increase the stiffness of the bridge to move all its lateral natural
frequencies out of the range that could be excited by the lateral footfall forces (it is believed to be possible for any
frequency below about 1.3Hz, hence a minimum target of 1.5Hz seems reasonable), and the second was to increase
the damping of the bridge to reduce the resonant response.
On the Millennium Bridge a total of 37 viscous dampers of viscous rate 250000 Ns/m and 4 pairs of tuned mass
dampers weighing 2.5 tonnes each were installed for lateral damping. Damping of the first central lateral mode of
0.49 Hz was 20% of critical damping. Another 26 pairs of vertical tuned mass dampers weighing 1 to 3 tonnes were
installed for some additional vertical damping.
635
Second Edition
5.3 GL, ML Dynamic Influence Line Analysis for Train Excitations on Bridges
A single point excitation does not have a spatial variation to it. Resonant response of different modes is likely
depending on the location of the point load with respect to the modal eigenvectors and the frequency of excitation
with respect to the natural modal frequency.
p p
ξ i ( t ) = D i ( t ) 0i = D i ( t ) 2 0i
Ki ω ni M i
{u i ( t )} = {φ i }ξ i ( t )
Lower modes are not necessarily more significant because the modal response depends on the modal force, modal
mass and the dynamic amplification. But a lower mode does however have a lower frequency making the modal
stiffness smaller, all else being equal, hence making the modal response larger. But even then, of course, the
physical response effects can be more critical from less significant modes (i.e. with lower modal responses) due to
the inherent shape of the eigenvector even if the scaling factor (i.e. the modal response) is smaller.
Now, earthquake excitations are special in the sense that the loading is distributed as it is a function of the
excitation acceleration and the mass of the structure. The loading has a fixed spatial location as the mass of the
structure of course does not move to another node. The excitation at different nodes on the structure is also in phase
with each other as there is only one source of excitation, namely the base acceleration. In this case, due to the
nature of the loading being distributed and spatially in phase, the modal participation factor (and hence also the
effective mass) is a good measure of the prominence of the natural mode to the base shear. Lower modes will be
more significant than higher modes for the base shear because the modal force of higher modes is small (as there is
cancellation of the modal force terms as there are positive and negative components of the eigenvector whilst there
being excitation in only one direction). But higher modes may well be significant for the local effects, the physical
response effects can be more critical from less significant modes (i.e. with lower modal responses) due to the
inherent shape of the eigenvector even if the scaling factor (i.e. the modal response) is smaller.
Train excitations are special in the sense that although the load is distributed, there is a spatial variation to the
excitation as the train travels over the bridge. This is equivalent to saying that there is a phase difference for the
excitation at different parts of the structure. If there were not to be a phase difference in the excitation between
different points, the train would have to be jumping vertically at the same spatial location. Consider two random
points of a bridge. The wheels of the train will in general travel over these two points at different instances even if
we consider the distance between the wheels to be constant (although in reality it is not), unless in the special case
the distance between the wheels is equal to the distance of the two nodes we are considering. Because of this phase
difference in excitation, it is impossible to excite any modes of the bridge resonantly from a passing train.
The solution is best performed in the time domain to include both the transient and steady state response due to a
train passing. Time history curves for every node within the path of the train will have to be defined according to
the speed of the train and the distance between the wheels. The loading of the passing train on a particular node can
be represented by a time history with spikes each time a wheel passes over it. A perfect model will include the
equivalent nodal loading whilst a wheel is between two adjacent nodes, hence making the loading time history on
the nodes less spiky and more realistic. But if these equivalent nodal loading is not to be considered, then an
estimate of the frequency of the impulse must be made. The time lapse between the peaks on the time history at a
particular node is of course dependent upon the speed of the train and the distance between the wheels.
In this problem, static loads refer to the static weight under gravity of the bridge, and dynamic loads refer to the
forces exerted by the wheels of the train onto the bridge. The loading of the passing train on a particular node can
be represented by a time history with spikes each time a wheel passes over it. The amplitude of these spikes are the
static weight of the train over the particular wheel. Considerations of equivalent nodal loading would result in a
time varying load history that rises and falls about a mean load. This mean load is automatically taken into account
in time domain analyses, but has to be applied separately if the analysis were to be performed in the frequency
domain.
636
Second Edition
A frequency domain solution may be used, but it may be argued that the starting transient is more significant than
the steady-state response, or at least significant. The excitation frequency and excitation phase difference would
have to be defined for every node within the path of the train according to the speed of the train, the distance
between the wheels and the location of the nodes with respect to each other. Of course, the frequency domain
solution will be much faster, but does not include the starting transient and the effects at a particular time i.e. time
dependent response cannot be determined (for instance the deflections, slope or cant of the track at a particular
time) cannot be established.
As for the speed of the train, it is impossible to generalize the most critical speed. One would think that in order to
excite a particular mode critically (chosen such that it has a significant vertical component), one would run the train
over the bridge at a speed such that speed of train = distance between wheels / period of mode. But since the
excitation is not in phase with each other at different spatial locations along the path, this may not be the critical
case. Of course it is prudent to run the train amongst others at the maximum possible speed and such that speed of
train = distance between wheels / period of mode. A complication that arises in both the time and frequency domain
is that in reality the spacing between the wheels of the train is not constant, hence requiring a more complicated
loading definition.
The model of the rail could include some smeared mass from the train, as that will contribute to the local
frequencies and the dynamic response. Apart from that, it is mandatory that not only translational stiffnesses are
used for the rail pads, but also rotational stiffnesses (except in the plane of shells) to connect the rails into the shells
representing the deck. This is to fully couple the beams representing the rails to the deck. If this was not done, then
the accuracy of the response on the rail beams will be severely compromised. Typical parameters are presented.
Property Stiffness (N/m) Structural Damping (Loss Factor)

Z – 90.0E6
Rail Pads On Solid Concrete Ground 0.40
X and Y – 10.0E6
Z – 70.0E6
Rail Pads On Ballast 0.40
X and Y – 10.0E6
Z – 12.5E6
Vanguard Pads Y – 20.0E6 0.40
X – 3.1E6
Z – 42.0E6
Booted Sleeper 0.40
X and Y – 10.0E6
637
Second Edition
Typical train loadings are presented.
This translates to the following load excitation at a particular node representing the force on one wheel end, hence,
half the above magnitudes since they represent the weight of the entire wheel axle.
The vertical acceleration response criteria at the train deck for passenger comfort set out by the by the UK CTRL is
0.5ms-2.
638
Second Edition
5.4 GL, ML Fluid (Wind & Water) - Structure Interaction (Aeroelastic Response Analysis)
Flow induced vibrations include: -
(I) Static Aeroelastic Response

(i) Along-Flow Drag
(ii) Across-Flow Lift
(iii) Torsional Divergence
(II) Dynamic Aeroelastic Response

(i) Along- and Across-Flow Unsteady Inertial Force Response
(ii) Along-Flow Gust Response
(iii) Along-Flow Buffeting Response
(iv) Across-Flow Von Karman Vortex Shedding Induced Response
(III) Dynamic Aeroelastic Stability

(i) Across-Flow Galloping
(ii) Across-Flow Classical Flutter
Apart from these, bodies within fluid are also subject to
(I) Upward buoyancy forces
(II) All direction atmospheric pressure 10kPa
(III) All direction hydrostatic forces ρ.g.(depth in fluid)
(IV) Downward gravitational forces
639
Second Edition
5.4.1 Elementary Hydraulics
5.4.1.1 Pipeline Design (Application of the Steady and Unsteady Bernoulli’s Equation)
640
Second Edition
641
Second Edition
642
Second Edition
643
Second Edition
644
Second Edition
645
Second Edition
646
Second Edition
647
Second Edition
648
Second Edition
649
Second Edition
650
Second Edition
651
Second Edition
652
Second Edition
653
Second Edition
654
Second Edition
655
Second Edition
656
Second Edition
657
Second Edition
658
Second Edition
659
Second Edition
660
Second Edition
661
Second Edition
662
Second Edition
663
Second Edition
664
Second Edition
665
Second Edition
666
Second Edition
667
Second Edition
668
Second Edition
669
Second Edition
670
Second Edition
671
Second Edition
672
Second Edition
673
Second Edition
674
Second Edition
675
Second Edition
676
Second Edition
677
Second Edition
678
Second Edition
679
Second Edition
680
Second Edition
681
Second Edition
682
Second Edition
683
Second Edition
684
Second Edition
685
Second Edition
686
Second Edition
687
Second Edition
688
Second Edition
689
Second Edition
690
Second Edition
691
Second Edition
692
Second Edition
693
Second Edition
694
Second Edition
695
Second Edition
696
Second Edition
697
Second Edition
698
Second Edition
699
Second Edition
700
Second Edition
701
Second Edition
702
Second Edition
703
Second Edition
704
Second Edition
705
Second Edition
706
Second Edition
707
Second Edition
708
Second Edition
709
Second Edition
710
Second Edition
711
Second Edition
712
Second Edition
713
Second Edition
714
Second Edition
715
Second Edition
716
Second Edition
717
Second Edition
718
Second Edition
719
Second Edition
720
Second Edition
721
Second Edition
722
Second Edition
723
Second Edition
724
Second Edition
5.4.1.2 Elementary Wave Mechanics (Small Amplitude Wave Theory)
5.4.1.2.1 Introduction
Wave number, k = 2π/L or 2π/λ, L or λ is the wave length

Wave frequency, σ = 2π/T, T = wave period
Wave amplitude, a measured from crest to still water level
Water depth, d
Water surface, η
Wave speed, c = λ/T = σ/k
Wave height, h = 2a
Small amplitude wave theory assumes mass continuity (incompressible fluid), irrotationality (no friction hence
invalid in boundary layer near sea bed), unsteady Bernoulli, motion is periodic in x and t, a << λ and a << d.
725
Second Edition
5.4.1.2.2 Basic Formulae
726
Second Edition
727
Second Edition
5.4.1.2.3 Formulae for Special Cases
728
Second Edition
729
Second Edition
5.4.1.2.4 Formulae for Analysis
730
Second Edition
731
Second Edition
5.4.2 Static Aeroelastic Response
The structural load distribution on an elastic vehicle in trimmed flight is determined by solving the equations for
static equilibrium. The SOL 144 and SOL 200 processes will calculate aerodynamic stability derivatives (e.g., lift
and moment curve slopes and lift and moment coefficients due to control surface rotation) and trim variables (e.g.,
angle of attack and control surface setting) as well as aerodynamic and structural loads, structural deflections, and
element stresses.
732
Second Edition
5.4.2.1 Along-Flow Direction Drag (Pressure Drag and Skin-Friction Drag) (Limited Amplitude Response)
The drag forces objects immersed in fluids, can be thought of as being comprised of two parts: -
Skin-friction Dτ – the forces applied by shearing as the liquid passes the solid boundaries.
Pressure-drag DP – the net forces applied to the body due to differences in the upstream and downstream
pressure fields.
Broadly speaking, both components of the total drag force increase with fluid velocity V.
Dτ ∝ Vn where n is in the range 1.2→1.8
DP ∝ V2
The relative magnitude of these two drag components depends on the geometry of the object in the fluid. For
‘stream-lined’ bodies e.g. a flat plate parallel to the flow direction, the drag will be almost entirely skin friction
while for ‘bluff’ bodies e.g. a flat plate normal to the flow direction, the pressure drag will dominate. For some
cross-sections e.g. a cylinder, the ratio of these two drag forces varies considerably depending on the flow regime.
But the skin friction drag is usually of a much smaller magnitude even for streamlined bodies.
The (pressure and skin friction) drag on a body immersed in a steady fluid flow can be expressed by a
dimensionless quantity known as the drag coefficient, CD, such that the total drag force on the body is given by
1
F = ρV 2 .C D .Area
2
The flow regime around a body is governed by a dimensionless quantity known as the Reynold’s Number, Re. This
dimensionless quantity is defined as the ratio of inertial to viscous forces in a fluid. The non-dimensional Reynolds
Number is defined for the flow around a cylinder as
ρVD
Re =
µ
where ρ is the fluid density, V the stream velocity relative to the cylinder, D the diameter of the cylinder and µ the
dynamic viscosity of the fluid.
733
Second Edition
At small Re < 0.5, the inertia effects are negligible and glow pattern very similar to ideal flow, the pressure
recovery being nearly complete. Pressure drag negligible and total profile drag is nearly all due to friction drag.
Here, CD and Re exhibit a straight line from which we can conclude that drag is directly proportional to the velocity
V (Stoke’s Law).
At 2 < Re < 30, separation of boundary layers occur. The boundary layer is laminar. Two symmetrical eddies
rotating in opposition to each other are formed. They remain fixed in position and the main flow closes behind
them. The separation of the boundary layer is reflected in the graph of CD versus Re by the curvature of the line
indicating that the drag is now proportional to Vn where n 2.
Further increase in Re (90 < Re < 2 x 105) tends to elongate the fixed eddies. At Re of 90 onwards, the eddies break
away from the cylinder. The separation point moves to an earlier point. The boundary layer is laminar. The
breaking away occurs alternately from one and then the other side of the cylinder, the eddies being washed away by
the mainstream. This process is intensified by further increase in Re, whereby the shedding of the eddies from
alternate sides of the cylinder is continuous, thus forming in the wake two discreet rows of vortices. This is known
as vortex street or von Karmon vortex street. The shedding of these vortices produces circulation and hence gives
rise to lateral forces on the cylinder.
It is fortunate that at higher Re (Re > 2 x 105) values the vortices disappear because of high rates of shear and are
then replaced by a highly turbulent wake. The boundary layer changes to turbulent (instead of laminar) before
separation. The effect of this is that the separation point moves later instead of the general trend of moving to an
earlier point. Hence a smaller wake results, and thus reduced drag. Regular vortex shedding occurs, not alternating
anymore. Roughness becomes important at high Re in determining CD.
At Re > 107, the value of CD appears to be independent of Re, but there is insufficient data at this end of the range.
An explanation of the boundary layer formation and its separation is warranted. For real fluids, a thin boundary
layer grows from the stagnation point at A. The boundary layer is a layer of fluid near the surface of the body
which is affect is affected by shear forces, hence friction is prominent and ideal flow theories do not hold. A to B is
the region of velocity increasing in x (acceleration), hence the pressure decreases in x i.e. a favourable pressure
gradient as the boundary layer tends to reduce in thickness. From B to C, the velocity decreases in x (deceleration),
hence the pressure increases in x i.e. an adverse pressure gradient as the boundary layer thickens. This force which
opposes the direction of fluid motion coupled with the action of the shear forces in the boundary layer if they act
for a sufficient length will bring the fluid in the boundary layer to rest and subsequently the flow separates from the
surface of the body. When the fluid near the surface begins to move in the other direction due to the adverse
pressure gradient, this implies that the boundary layer (i.e. the point where the fluid is zero velocity) separates from
the surface. This flow separation has serious consequences in aerofoil design as once the flow separates away from
the surface, all lift is lost.
B
x
A C
Flow in the wake is highly turbulent and consists of large scale eddies. High rate energy dissipation occurs with the
result of a pressure reduction in the wake. But the stagnation pressure in front is high and thus the resultant force
arising from pressure difference is called the drag force. The bigger the wake (i.e. the earlier the boundary layer
separation point), the smaller the pressure in the wake and so the greater the pressure drag.
734
Second Edition
5.4.2.2 Across-Flow Direction Lift (Pressure Lift and Skin-Friction Lift) (Limited Amplitude Response)
The (pressure and skin friction) lift is analogous to the drag and acts in the direction perpendicular to the direction
of fluid motion.
1
F = ρV 2 .C L .Area
2
Lift occurs when the faster moving fluid on top of the aerofoil has a lower pressure to the slower moving fluid
underneath. If the boundary layer separation occurs at the top of the aerofoil, the suction pressure is lost. This is
known as stalling. The plane will then drop from the sky. The only solution is to put the plane in a dive to regain
the boundary layer.
The two dimensional drag and lift coefficients for structural shapes are presented.
Clearly, the lift is zero for a body symmetrical about the direction of flow.
735
Second Edition
5.4.2.3 Non-Oscillatory Torsional Divergence (Divergent Amplitude Response)
Divergence can occur if the aerodynamic torsional stiffness (i.e. the rate of change of pitching moment with
rotation) is negative. At the critical wind speed the negative aerodynamic stiffness becomes numerically equal to
the structural torsional stiffness resulting in zero total stiffness.
Torsional divergence is an instance of a static response of a structure. Torsional divergence was at first associated
with aircraft wings due to their susceptibility to twisting off at excessive air speeds (Simiu and Scanlan, 1986). Liu,
1991, reports that when the wind flow occurs, drag, lift, and moment are produced on the structure. This moment
induces a twist on the structure and causes the angle of incidence α to increase. The increase in α results in higher
torsional moment as the wind velocity increases. If the structure does not have sufficient torsional stiffness to resist
this increasing moment, the structure becomes unstable and will be twisted to failure. Simiu and Scanlan, 1986,
report that the phenomenon depends upon structural flexibility and the manner in which the aerodynamic moments
develop with twist; it does not depend upon ultimate strength. They say that in most cases the critical divergence
velocities are extremely high, well beyond the range of velocities normally considered in design.
736
Second Edition
BD 49/01 (valid depending on the aerodynamic susceptibility parameter, Pb and satisfying some geometric
constraints) the states that a bridge is unsusceptible to non-oscillatory torsional divergence if it is stable against
self-induced instability, i.e. galloping (and stall flutter) and classical flutter.
737
Second Edition
BD 49/01 is valid depending on the value of the aerodynamic susceptibility parameter, Pb
where ρ is the density of air, b is the overall width of the bridge deck, m is the mass per unit length of the bridge, Vr
is the hourly mean wind speed (for relieving areas), L is the length of the relevant maximum span of the bridge and
fB is the natural frequency in bending. Then
(a) If Pb < 0.04, bridge is subject to insignificant effects in respect of all forms of aerodynamic excitation.
(b) Bridges having 0.04 ≤ Pb ≤ 1.00 shall be considered to be within the scope of the BD 49/01 rules.
(c) Bridges with Pb > 1.00 shall be considered to be potentially very susceptible to aerodynamic excitation
and are thus beyond the scope of BD 49/01. Further analytical and/or wind tunnel tests must be performed.
Normal highway bridges of less than 25m span should generally be found to be category (a). Bridges of spans
greater than 250m are likely to be category (c). Covered footbridges, cable supported bridges and other structures
where any of the parameters b, L or fB cannot be accurately derived shall be considered as category (c). For the
purposes of initial/ preliminary categorisation, the following may be used to given an indicative range for Pb:
Vr between 20 and 40 m/s;
m/b between 600 and 1200 kg/m2;
fB between 50/L0.87 and 100/L0.87, with L in metres..
The geometric constraints for the applicability of BD 49/01 are detailed.

(i) Solid edge members, such as fascia beams and solid parapets shall have a total depth less than
0.2d4 unless positioned closer than 0.5d4 from the outer girder when they shall not protrude above
the deck by more than 0.2d4 nor below the deck by more than 0.5d4. In defining such edge
members, edge stiffening of the slab to a depth of 0.5 times the slab thickness may be ignored.
(ii) Other edge members such as parapets, barriers, etc., shall have a height above deck level, h, and a
solidity ratio, φ, such that φ is less than 0.5 and the product hφ is less than 0.35d4 for the effective
edge member. The value of φ may exceed 0.5 over short lengths of parapet, provided that the total
length projected onto the bridge centre-line of both the upwind and downwind portions of parapet
whose solidity ratio exceeds 0.5 does not exceed 30% of the bridge span.
(iii) Any central median barrier shall have a shadow area in elevation per metre length less than 0.5m2.
Kerbs or upstands greater than 100mm deep shall be considered as part of this constraint by
treating as a solid bluff depth; where less than 100mm the depth shall be neglected, see figure
below.
In the above, d4 is the reference depth of the bridge deck. Where the depth is variable over the span, d4 shall be
taken as the average value over the middle third of the longest span.
738
Second Edition
739
Second Edition
5.4.3 Dynamic Aeroelastic Response
Aeroelastic analysis concerns the interaction of aerodynamic and structural (inertial, damping and stiffness) forces.
It is utilized in the design of airplanes, suspension bridges, missiles, power lines, tall chimneys etc.
5.4.3.1 Along- and Across-Flow Direction Unsteady Inertial Forces on General Submerged Structures Due
to Water Waves (Limited Amplitude Response)
Based on small amplitude wave mechanics, the unsteady (time varying) pressure distribution under the surface of
the fluid on a general submerged structure due to waves is
ρga cosh k ( y + d )
p= sin(σt − kx )
cosh kd
where ρ = density of fluid

a = amplitude of waves
k = 2π/L, where L is the wavelength
y = height above fluid surface, measure positive upwards
d = total depth of fluid
σ = 2π/T, where T is the wave period
This pressure expression is integrated with respect to y from –d to 0 for the total force.
740
Second Edition
5.4.3.2 Along- and Across-Flow Direction Unsteady Inertial Forces on Cylindrical Submerged Structures
Due to Water Waves (And Along-Flow Direction Drag Forces Due to Steady Currents) (Limited
Amplitude Response)
The unsteady inertial force on a cylinder is given by

1 ∂u
F = ρπ.d 2 .C M . ( Force per length)
4 ∂t
CM is the inertial coefficient which varies depending upon the degree of flow separation and wake formation.
Experimental measurements have shown that the amplitude of the fluid motion relative to the diameter of the
cylinder has an important effect on the nature of the induced loading. The ratio is defined as the Keulegan-
Carpenter number. The KC number is really the drag versus inertia ratio.
KC = uT/d
where u is the velocity amplitude, T the period of oscillatory motion and d the diameter of the cylinder. This
characterizes the Morrison’s equation which includes the steady drag force and the unsteady inertial force.
1 1 ∂u
F= ρV 2 .C D .d + ρπ.d 2 .C M . (Force per length)
2 4 ∂t
Coefficients
2.0
CM
1.0
CD
0.0 KC
10 20 30 40 50
For small KC, the velocity amplitude is small relative to the diameter of the cylinder. Flow does not separate fully
and thus in the limiting case where KC is very small the flow becomes potential flow. Hence the drag coefficient
reduces to 0.0 and the inertial coefficient becomes 2.0 (idealized case). For large KC, the velocity amplitude is
larger than the cylinder diameter. Both inertial and drag forces are important. However since the drag is
proportional to V2, this will produce the dominant contribution to Morison’s equation.
741
Second Edition
742
Second Edition
743
Second Edition
5.4.3.3 Along-Flow Direction Gust Response (And Along-Flow Direction Drag Forces Due to Steady Mean
Wind) (Limited Amplitude Response)
The total wind velocity is

Utotal (z, t) = Umean (z) + Ugust (z, t)
The mean velocity is defined
Umean (z) = U10 . (z / 10)α
where U10 is the reference mean wind speed at 10m above ground and α is the roughness coefficient
α = 0.16 for open country
α = 0.28 for woods, villages and towns
α = 0.40 for large city centres
Note that U10 usually lies between 24 and 34ms-1. The mean velocity gives rise to the steady drag force.
The gust gives rise to the dynamic gust response. The spectral density of the gust is defined as follows.
Gust spectral density = Gust spectrum x (Aerodynamic admittance function)2
The gust spectrum is the wind speed spectra at a particular point. The aerodynamic admittance function defines the
relationship between the gust frequency and its area of influence. Gusts of higher frequency have a smaller area of
influence and vice versa. The gust spectral density function usually exhibit peak frequencies between 0.05 and
0.1Hz.
Passive tuned mass dampers offer little to reducing gust response due to the impulsive nature of the excitation.
Stiffening the structure is the usual effective approach.
For design purposes, as described in codes of practise, the wind force due to both mean speed and gust can be
obtained using the equivalent static wind force
W = ϕ . cf . q . A
where
ϕ = gust factor
cf = aerodynamic resistance coefficient
q = wind drag pressure = ρUmean2/2
A = area loaded
The gust factor ϕ considers both the stochastically varying aerodynamic properties of the natural wind and the
vibration behaviour of the structure in its fundamental mode as is given by
ϕ = 1 + R (B + s.F/Λ)0.5
where
R = terrain factor = function (α)
B = basic gust factor = function (d, h)
d = width of structure
h = height of structure
s = size factor = function (f.h/Uh,d/h)
F = gust energy factor = function (f/Uh)
f = structural fundamental frequency in wind direction
Uh = mean wind speed at height h
Λ = damping (expressed as logarithmic decrement) of the fundamental mode
In BS 6399-2, the pressure and skin friction drag is respectively
where Cf is the friction drag coefficient, As is the area swept by the wind and Cr is the dynamic augmentation factor
744
Second Edition
where Sg is the gust factor. The pressure drag force is
The (internal and external) pressures, p applied on the structure are calculated from
p = q s . Cp . C a
where Cp is the (internal or external) pressure coefficient, Ca is the size effect factor and the dynamic wind pressure,
qs is
qs = 0.613Ve2
where the (structure dependent) effective wind speed, Ve is
Ve = Vs . Sb
where
Sb = the terrain factor
Vs = (site dependent) site wind speed
= Vb . Sa . Sd . Ss . Sp
where
Vb = (area dependent) basic hourly mean wind speed at 10m height above sea level
Sa = altitude factor
Sd = direction factor
Ss = seasonal factor
Sp = probability factor
The skin friction drag is ignored. Only the more significant pressure drag is accounted for. For the site of Metz
which is in Department Moselle, i.e. Zone 2, corresponding basic wind speed (reference EC1) is
Vb = 26 m/s
The site wind speed
Vs = Vb . Sa . Sd . Ss . Sp
≈ 26 m/s
where
the altitude factor, Sa ≈ 1.0 (non significant topographical effects)
the direction factor, Sd = 1.0 (wind direction III – 210°)
the seasonal factor, Ss = 1.0 (since it is a permanent building and hence exposed for at least 6 months)
the probability factor, Sp = 1.0 (for standard 2% probability of exceedance)
The structure dependent effective wind speed, Ve is

Ve = Vs . Sb
= 48 m/s
where the terrain and building factor (taking effective height, He = 30m conservatively as the whole height and
assuming site in town >100km to closest distance to sea) is
Sb = 1.85
745
Second Edition
The dynamic wind pressure, qs is thus

qs = 0.613Ve2
= 1.42 kPa
The pressure, p applied on the structure is thus

p = q s . Cp . C a
= qs.(Cpe-Cpi).Ca
= 1.106(Cpe-Cpi)
where the size effect factor (taking the loaded area diagonal, a = (902 + 302)0.5 = 95m and assuming site in town
>100km to closest distance to sea) is
Ca = 0.78
746
Second Edition
where the external pressure coefficient Cpe for duo-pitch roofs is obtained from as follows
747
Second Edition
The scaling lengths bL and bW where bL = L or bL = 2H, whichever is the smaller, and bW = W or bW = 2H,
whichever is the smaller. External pressure can be negative for low-pitched roofs while it becomes positive for
higher pitches. For a +60° roof, on average we have +0.8 on the side facing the wind and –0.65 on the side not
facing the wind. The asymmetric load case must be applied.
External pressure coefficients for mansard roofs and other multi-pitch roofs should be derived for each plane
face by the procedure given for duo-pitch roofs.
748
Second Edition
The external pressure coefficient Cpe for flat roofs is obtained from
749
Second Edition
The coefficients for hipped roofs are presented.
750
Second Edition
751
Second Edition
The external pressure coefficient Cpe for building walls is obtained from
752
Second Edition
The internal pressure coefficient Cpi for roofs and buildings is obtained from the following for buildings with
dominant openings
The internal pressure coefficients for enclosed buildings is
Pressure coefficients are considered positive when pressure is acting on the surface (i.e. normal to the surface) of
structure and negative when the pressure is acting away from the surface (still normal to the surface). Hence
positive external pressure acts inward on structure and positive internal pressure acts outward on structure, and vice
versa. It is important then to apply pressure loads in the local coordinate system of the element in a finite element
program and not in the global axes system.
Internal pressure occurs due to openings such as windows, doors, vents and cladding. In general if the windward
panel has a greater opening than the leeward panel, more wind comes in than out and hence the interior is subject to
positive (outward of building) pressure, and vice versa.
Note that the net pressure coefficient, Cp for buildings is
Note that the net pressure coefficient, Cp on a free−standing signboard is 1.8.
Note that the net upward pressure coefficient, Cp on a canopy is 1.8.
753
Second Edition
754
Second Edition
755
Second Edition
Note that the net pressure coefficients, Cp on long cylinders and sharp edged elements such as rolled sections,
plate girders and boxes are
Finally, the design pressure is

pdesign = 0.85[1.106(Cpe-Cpi)].(1+Cr)
where the dynamic augmentation factor Cr is given by
The gust factor is

Sg = 1 + gtStTt
= 1.52
obtained from
756
Second Edition
gust peak factor, gt = 2.30 (for He ~ 30m, a ~ 95m) (Table 24)

turbulence factor, St = 0.159 (for He ~ 30m, site >100m from sea) (Table 22)
turbulence adjustment factor, Tt = 1.43 (for He ~ 30m, upwind distance from edge of town > 30m)
(note Tt = 1 for country site) (Table 23)
Now,
where terrain correction factor, Kt = 0.75 (since town site; 1.33 if sea coast) and the terrain and building factor
757
Second Edition
SO = ScTc(1+Sh) = 0.996
obtained from
the fetch factor, Sc = 1.2 (Table 22)
the fetch adjustment factor, Tc = 0.83 (Table 23)
topographic increment, Sh = 0 (for flat sites)
Hence,
Kh x Kb = 0.75 x (20 x 0.996 / (no2 x 95))2/3 x (26/(24ζ))
= 0.287 (1/no2)2/3 (1/ζ)
where no is the fundamental natural frequency in Hz and the ζ the viscous damping of critical.
Thus the dynamic augmentation factor becomes

Cr = 0.567 x [(1+(0.287 (1/no2)2/3 (1/ζ))/60)0.5 − 1]
Note that the structure is mildly dynamic for Cr < 0.25, but susceptible to dynamic amplifications in response to the
gust if Cr > 0.25 in which case this simplified equivalent static procedure would be less accurate, but generally
more conservative.
Thus, the design pressure is

pdesign = 0.85[1.106(Cpe-Cpi)].(1+Cr)
= 0.85[1.106(Cpe-Cpi)].(1+0.567 x [(1+(0.287 (1/no2)2/3 (1/ζ))/60)0.5 − 1])
To ensure that structure not susceptible to dynamic amplifications from gust, need Cr at most 0.25. For assumed
damping of critical of ζ = 0.04, thus no must be at least 0.19Hz. At this value of Cr of 0.25,
pdesign = 0.85[1.106(Cpe-Cpi)].(1+0.25)
= 1.18 (Cpe-Cpi) kPa
For comfort criteria, the peak acceleration at the top of a building for resonance in a fundamental bending mode
can be estimated from
& x&res (2πn 0 )2
x&= &
M
= G res (2πn 0 )2
M1
where
Gres = gust factor for resonant component = g2(σv/V)h(SE/ζ)0.5
M = mean base overturning moment; for a square building, it can be approximated by 0.6 ½ ρVh2bh2
M1 = inertial base bending moment for unit displacement at top of building; for constant density and linear
mode shape, = 1/3 ρ bdh2 (2πn0)2
g = peak factor
n0 = first bending mode natural frequency; can be approximated by 46/h where h is height in metres
(σv/V)h = longitudinal turbulence intensity at height h
T = period under consideration, sec; usually 600 sec for acceleration criteria
h = height of building
b = width of building
d = depth of building
Vh = hourly mean wind speed at height h
S = size factor = 1/[(1+3.5n0h/Vh)(1+4n0b/Vh)]
E = longitudinal turbulence spectrum = 0.47N/(2+N2)5/6
N = reduced frequency = nLh/Vh
Lh = measure of turbulence length scale = 1000 (h/10)0.25
ρ = air density
ρS = building density
ζ = critical damping ratio
Note that tall buildings have generally SLS and ULS values of reduced velocity (Vh/(n0b)) within the range 2 to 10.
Bachmann gives acceleration limits for buildings as follows.
758
Second Edition
Perception Acceleration Limits

Imperceptible a < 0.005g
Perceptible 0.005g < a < 0.015g
Annoying 0.015g < a < 0.05g
Very Annoying 0.05g < a < 0.15g
Intolerable a > 0.15g
constraints) states that provided the fundamental frequencies in both bending and torsion calculated are greater
than 1Hz, the dynamic magnification effects of turbulence may be ignored. The dynamic magnification effects of
turbulence may also be neglected if PT < 1.0 where (using consistent set of units)
and ρ is the density of air, b is the overall width of the bridge deck, m is the mass per unit length of the bridge and
fB the natural frequency of bridge in bending.
Vs is the site hourly mean wind speed (10m above ground level). σflm is the peak stress in the structure per unit
deflection in the first mode of vibration, derived for the most highly stressed location in the relevant element (Units
in N/mm²/Unit deflection). σc is a reference stress as follows
for steel beam elements, σc = 600 N/mm2 for the longitudinal flange bending stress;
for truss bridges, σc = 750 N/mm2 for the chord axial stress;
for concrete elements (composite or concrete bridges), σc = 80 N/mm2 for primary bending concrete stress
for cable-stayed bridges the peak stay axial stress should additionally be examined, with σc = 1200 N/mm2.
The MSC.NASTRAN aeroelastic dynamic response problem determines the response of the aircraft to time or
frequency-varying excitations. Atmospheric turbulence is the primary example of this type of excitation, but wind
shear and control surface motion can also have an aeroelastic component. Methods of generalized harmonic
(Fourier) analysis are applied to the linear system to obtain the response to the excitation in the time domain. The
gust response analysis may be regarded either as a stationary random loading or as a discrete gust. The gust
analysis capability computes the response to random atmospheric turbulence, discrete one-dimensional gust fields,
and control surface motion and other dynamic loading. The random response parameters calculated are the power
spectral density, root mean square response, and mean frequency of zero-crossings. The response to the discrete
gust and control surface motion is calculated by direct and inverse Fourier transform methods since the oscillatory
aerodynamics are known only in the frequency domain. The time histories of response quantities are the output in
the discrete case.
One subsonic and three supersonic lifting surface aerodynamic theories are available in MSC.Nastran, as well as
Strip Theory. The subsonic theory is the Doublet-Lattice method, which can account for interference among
multiple lifting surfaces and bodies. The supersonic theories are the Mach Box method, Piston Theory, and the
ZONA51 method for multiple interfering lifting surfaces. MSC.Nastran has implemented six aerodynamic theories:
1. Doublet-Lattice subsonic lifting surface theory (DLM)
2. ZONA51 supersonic lifting surface theory
3. Subsonic wing-body interference theory (DLM with slender bodies)
4. Mach Box method
5. Strip Theory
6. Piston Theory
The coupling with aerodynamic loads has also been added to the existing MSC.Nastran structural modal frequency
response capability, SOL 146. Analyses of frequency response to arbitrarily specified forcing functions can be
carried out using the oscillatory aerodynamic loads from many of the available aerodynamic theories. Frequency
759
Second Edition
response to a harmonic gust field can be calculated at subsonic speeds using the Doublet-Lattice method for
wing/body interference, and by the ZONA51 method for interfering lifting surfaces at supersonic speeds. Because
unsteady aerodynamic loads are obtained only for steady-state harmonic motion, they are known only in the
frequency- and not the time-domain. In SOL 146, Inverse Fourier Transform techniques provide the appropriate
methods by which transient response is obtained from the frequency response. Both forward and inverse Fourier
transforms are provided so that the time-varying forcing function or the gust profile can be transformed into the
frequency domain. Then, after convolution with the system frequency response, the inverse transform leads to the
transient response of the system to the specified forcing function or gust profile.
Stationary random response of the system, is available in SOL 146 from specified loadings and the power spectral
densities of loads. Loads may be either specified force distributions or harmonic gust fields. The statistical
quantities of interest in the response are A, the ratio of standard deviations (rms values) of the response to that of
the input loading, and N0, the mean frequency of zero crossings (with a positive slope) of the response. The
capability to compute these quantities was added to MSC.Nastran by modifying the existing random response
module to include options to generate various atmospheric turbulence power spectra and to perform the calculation
of N0. Dynamic aeroelasticity differs from the flutter analysis in that the right-hand side of the equation is no longer
zero. Instead, loading, which can be in either the frequency or the time domain, is applied. For both types of
loading, MSC.Nastran performs the primary analyses in the frequency domain. If the user has supplied loadings in
the time domain, Fourier Transform techniques are used to convert the loadings into the frequency domain, a
frequency response analysis is performed, and the computed quantities are transformed back to the time domain
using Inverse Fourier Transform techniques. Aeroelastic frequency response analysis in MSC.Nastran is performed
in modal coordinates and has a basic equation of the form
The right-hand side provides the loading in modal coordinates, which can be aerodynamic or nonaerodynamic in
nature and is a function of the analysis frequency. Nonaerodynamic generalized loads, designated PHF(w), are
obtained in the standard fashion from the loadings applied to physical coordinates. The solution of the equation
entails solving for the generalized displacements by decomposition/forward-backward substitution techniques
applied to the coupled set of complex equations. Because modal reduction techniques have been applied, the
solution costs are typically modest. Once the generalized displacements have been computed, standard data
recovery techniques can be used to determine physical displacements, velocities, stress, etc.
760
Second Edition
5.4.3.4 Along-Flow Direction Buffeting Response (Limited Amplitude Response)
The airflow behind obstacles exhibit increased turbulence which can be of a stochastic nature or a period regular
shedding of (von Karman) vortices (defined by the Strouhal number). These vortices give rise to periodic dynamic
forces acting on structures that lie within such an air flow. This phenomenon is called buffeting. Note that we are
not talking about the response on the obstacle (which may suffer from vortex shedding excitations) but instead on
the structures behind, i.e. within the turbulent wake. The ratio of the distance a between the obstacle and the
structure and the width d of the obstacle is important. Considerable dynamic effects are obtained from a/d 2 to 16,
peaking at about 8.
Buffeting can be avoided by stiffening the downwind structure in the air flow. Alternatively, since the wind effect
is periodic, its influence can be reduced by increasing damping or using tuned mass dampers, or as with vortex
shedding control, Scruton helical stabilizing devices can be used.
761
Second Edition
5.4.3.5 Across-Flow Direction Von Karman Vortex Shedding Induced Response (Limited Amplitude
Response)
When a body is subjected to wind flow, the separation of flow around the body produces forces on the body, a
pressure force on the windward side and a suction force on the leeward side. The pressure and suction forces result
in the formation of vortices in the wake region. These vortices tend to be shed from alternate sides of the body at
Reynold’s number of around 90 to 2 x 105. The large radius (small curvature) vortices produce higher pressures
whilst the small radius (large curvature) vortices produce lower pressures, giving rise to alternating lateral forces.
Vortex shedding is responsible for the whistling of hanging telephone or power cables. When the frequency of the
vortex shedding (aka wake frequency) is close to a prominent natural frequency of the structure, the resulting
condition is called lock-in, so-called because the wake frequency remains locked to the natural frequency for a
range of wind speeds. During lock-in, the structural member oscillates with increased amplitude but rarely exceeds
half the across wind dimension of the body. As the velocity further increases, the wake frequency will again
break away from the natural frequency.
Vortex Shedding Frequency
Lock-in region around natural

frequency of structure
Wind velocity
The vortex shedding phenomena is describable in terms of a non-dimensional Strouhal Number defined as
NSD
S== function of geometry and Reynold' s Number
V
where NS is the frequency of the vortex shedding, D is the characteristic dimension of the body projected on a plane
normal to the mean flow velocity and V the stream velocity. If the shedding frequency is approximately
proportional to V, then S is constant.
The Strouhal number for a cylinder is approximately 0.2 but more accurately
 19.7 
0.1981 - 
 Re 
The Strouhal number for other noncircular shapes are presented.
762
Second Edition
The dynamic response at resonance of a natural structural frequency (with the vortex shedding frequency) can be
obtained by multiplying the static response to the lift force
1
F = ρV 2 .C L .Area
2
by the dynamic amplification 1/(2ζ). In other words the dynamic equilibrium equation is
1
m&u&+ cu&+ ku = ρV 2 .C L .Area. sin (2πN s t )
2
Unfortunately, CL is not constant instead varying with amplitude.
Alternatively, the following equation may be used

y0/d = 0.123.CL.(1/S2).(1/Sc)
where y0 is the displacement amplitude, S the Strouhal number and Sc the Scruton number given by
Sc = 2.m.(2πζ)/(ρ.D2)
where ζ is the (of critical) damping, m the mass per unit length and D the across flow dimension.
Other expressions are presented, here δr is another notation for the Scruton number Sc.
Graphs showing estimates of displacement are presented.
763
Second Edition
As an example, consider a steel circular pile driven vertically into the bed of a river of depth 20m and stream
velocity V. The pile dimensions are
Outer diameter, D = 0.7m

Wall thickness, t = 0.01m
Mass of pile in air, mp = 169kg/m
I = 1.29E-3 m4
E = 200E9 N/m2
Density of water, ρ = 1020 kg/m3
Added mass of water per unit length = ¼ ρπD2
Damping ratio, ζ = 0.015
Firstly, the critical stream velocities, V at which vortex shedding locks-in to the first two fundamental frequencies
are required.
Total pile mass per unit length = mass in air + water in hollow pile + added mass of water
= 169 + 1020 x ¼ π(0.7-0.02)2 + 1020 x ¼ π(0.7)2
= 931.9 kg/m
Effective length of pile adding a fixing length of 6D say = 20 + 6 x 0.7 = 24.2m
3.52 EI
1st natural bending frequency = ≈ 0.50Hz
2π mL4
22 EI
2nd natural bending frequency = ≈ 3.15Hz
2π mL4
Lock in for the 1st mode occurs at V = ND/S = 0.50 x 0.7 / 0.2 = 1.75m/s
Lock in for the 2nd mode occurs at V = ND/S = 3.15 x 0.7 / 0.2 = 11.03m/s
Secondly, the amplitude of the cross-flow vibrations need to be estimated. This can be performed using the graph
presented above.
Scruton number, Sc or δr = 2.m.(2πζ)/(ρ.D2) = 2 x 931.9 x (2 x π x 0.015) / (1020 x 0.72) = 0.35
764
Second Edition
From graph, (A/D)/γ = 1.1

Hence, A1 = 1.1 x 0.7 x 1.305 = 1.0m
Hence, A2 = 1.1 x 0.7 x 1.499 = 1.2m
The pile is clearly unacceptable due to its susceptibility to vortex shedding for low velocities and due to the large
amplitude vortex induced motion. The above proceedings can be most readily applied to a steel chimney stack in a
steady wind stream.
To avoid vortex shedding, increase structural frequency to avoid resonance, increase structural damping
inherent or by using tuned mass dampers or add a vortex suppression device such as a Scruton helical device to
ensure vortex shedding lines are no longer vertical lines but spirals and hence reducing the dynamic effect.
BD 49/01 (valid depending on the aerodynamic susceptibility parameter, Pb) states that any bridge with
fundamental vertical bending or torsional frequency greater than 5Hz shall be stable with respect to vortex
shedding. Truss bridges with solidity ratio, φ < 0.5 are also stable against vortex shedding excitations. The solidity
ratio is defined as the ratio of the net total projected area of the truss components to the front face of the windward
truss over the projected area of encompassed by the outer boundaries of the truss, excluding depth of the deck.
Plate girder bridges shall be considered unsusceptible to excitation of the vertical bending or torsional modes if
the critical wind speed, Vcr is greater than the reference wind speed, Vvs = 1.25Vr where Vr is the hourly mean wind
speed. Otherwise susceptible. The critical wind speed is obtained from below.
Note that d4 is the depth of the bridge and b* the effective width. Where the depth is variable over the span, d4 shall
be taken as the average value over the middle third of the longest span; is either fB or fT as appropriate, i.e. the
natural frequencies in bending and torsion respectively (Hz) calculated under dead and superimposed dead load.
765
Second Edition
Truss bridges with φ > 0.5 can be evaluated using the plate girder bridge equation by taking d4 as φd4.
Eurocode 1-2.4:1995 presents rules for vortex shedding as follows.
766
Second Edition
767
Second Edition
768
Second Edition
769
Second Edition
770
Second Edition
771
Second Edition
772
Second Edition
773
Second Edition
774
Second Edition
775
Second Edition
776
Second Edition
5.4.4 Dynamic Aeroelastic Stability
In this self-induced vibration, the aerodynamic excitation forces depend on the motion of the structure itself.
Circular cylinders are not affected by this kind of vibration, but all other sectional shapes are.
5.4.4.1 Across-Flow Direction Galloping and Stall Flutter (Divergent Amplitude Response)
Across-wind galloping causes a crosswise vibration in the bridge deck. As the section vibrates crosswise in a steady
wind velocity U, the relative velocity changes, thereby changing the angle of attack (α). Due to the change in α, an
increase or decrease on the lift force of the cylinder occurs. If an increase of α causes an increase in the lift force in
the opposite direction of motion, the situation is stable. But on the other hand if the vice versa occurs, i. e., an
increase of α causes a decrease in lift force, then the situation is unstable and galloping occurs. A classical example
of this phenomenon is observed in ice covered power transmission lines. Galloping is reduced in these lines by
decreasing the distance between spacing of the supports and increasing the tension of the lines.
Under certain conditions of profile shape and incidence angle, the so-called aerodynamic damping can be negative
and where structural damping is small, galloping instability occurs. It depends on the characteristics of the variation
of drag, lift and pitching moment with the angle of incidence. The Glauert-den Hartog instability criterion for
galloping is
dCL/dα + CD < 0 or since dCy/dα = −[dCL/dα + CD] thus dCy/dα > 0
where CL is the lift coefficient, α is the angle of incidence of the airflow and Cy the force coefficient. This is proven
from the mathematics as presented below.
From the mathematics, the critical wind speed is given by

Ugallop/nD = 2.Sc/(dCy/dα)α=0
777
Second Edition
where n is the natural structural frequency and the Scruton number (or so-called reduced damping) Sc =
2.m.(2πζ)/(ρ.D2). Note that U/nD is the reduced velocity. Hence the critical galloping wind velocity can be
calculated using the above equation with the gradient (dCy/dα) where α is in radians obtained from graphs of Cy
versus α. Likewise the natural frequency n of the structure can be adjusted to increase the critical velocity.
778
Second Edition
As an example, it may be necessary to determine the fundamental natural frequency of a structure so that it should
not flexurally gallop at wind speeds less than U = 30m/s with the flow direction at α = 0. Some parameters are ρ =
1.23 kg/m3, D = 0.1m, m = 25kg/m and ζ = 0.015.
Sc = 2.m.(2πζ)/(ρ.D2) = 2 x 25 x (2π x 0.015) / (1.23 x 0.12) = 383
From the above Cy vs α graph for square sections, (dCy/dα)α=0 = 2.7 (Note α calculated in radians!)
Hence 2.Sc/(dCy/dα)α=0 = 2 x 383 / 2.7 = 284
Natural frequency for critical wind speed of 30m/s, n = 30 / (284 x 0.1) = 1.05 Hz.
Another example involves the flexural galloping susceptibility assessment of a solid Rhendex pile with a
submerged depth of 15.8m in a steady stream. Some additional parameters are D = 0.7m, mass = 607.5kg/m, I =
2.2E-3m4, E = 200E9 N/m2, ζ = 0.01 and ρ = 1020kg/m3. Added water mass = 1020 x ¼ π(0.7)2 = 393kg/m.
Total mass = 607.5 + 393 = 1000.5 kg/m

Effective length of pile adding a fixing length of 6D say = 15.8 + 6 x 0.7 = 20.0m
3.52 EI
1st natural bending frequency = ≈ 0.93Hz
2π mL4
Sc = 2.m.(2πζ)/(ρ.D2) = 2 x 1000.5 x (2π x 0.01) / (1020 x 0.72) = 0.25
From the above Rhendex section CD and CL vs α graph, we see that dCL/dα is negative for 25° < α
< 50° and 82° < α < 98° for which dCy/dα = CD + dCL/dα is 1.2 and 2.4 respectively.
Hence 2.Sc/(dCy/dα)25°<α<50° = 2 x 0.25 / 1.2 = 0.42
and 2.Sc/(dCy/dα)82°<α<98° = 2 x 0.25 / 2.4 = 0.24
Thus, U = 0.42 x 0.93 x 0.7 = 0.27 m/s for 25° < α < 50°
and U = 0.24 x 0.93 x 0.7 = 0.14 m/s for 82° < α < 98°
Another galloping example involves the torsional galloping of a bridge deck based on experimental motion
derivatives as opposed to the static derivatives dCy/dα. Consider a bridge deck with the following parameters, I =
540000kgm2, vertical stiffness per unit length k = 21060N/m, torsional damping ratio ζT = 0.007, ρ = 1.2kg/m3 and
width of deck B = 18m. Equating the torsional equation of motion to the Scanlan and Tomko moment and denoting
the critical condition to be the onset of negative total damping, the following presents the results.
779
Second Edition
Estimates of amplitude for a square section can be made from the following graph.
Galloping can be avoided by changing the cross section, changing the flow direction, increasing the Scruton
number or by increasing damping.
Galloping is a 1 DOF system whilst classical flutter is a 2 DOF (bending and torsion) system. Galloping differs
from vortex shedding in a few ways.
Vortex Shedding Galloping

Caused by instability of the fluid motion Caused by motion of structure
Critical stream velocity depends on shape Critical stream velocity depends on shape of body AND
of body, but not damping damping
Amplitude is limited Amplitude is not limited
Damping affects amplitude Damping has little effect on amplitude
constraints) states that a bridge will be stable against galloping and stall flutter if the critical wind speed for
bending and torsional motion, Vg is greater than wind speed Vwo
Vr is the hourly mean wind speed. Vd is the maximum wind gust speed for the relevant maximum span; K1A is a
coefficient selected to give an appropriate low probability of occurrence of these severe forms of oscillation. For
locations in the UK, K1A = 1.25. Note that a higher value of K1A is appropriate for other climatic regions, eg
typically K1A = 1.4 for a tropical cyclone-prone location. The critical galloping and stall flutter wind speed is
considered for vertical bending and torsional motion. Vertical motion need be considered only for bridges of types
3, 3A, 4 and 4A as shown before, and only if b < 4d4. The critical velocity for vertical motion is
where the reduced velocity is
780
Second Edition
Note that ρ is the density of air, m is the mass per unit length of the bridge and fB the natural frequency of bridge in
bending. Cg is 2.0 for bridges of type 3 and 4 with side overhang greater than 0.7d4 or 1.0 for bridges of type 3, 3A,
4 and 4A with side overhang less than or equal to 0.7d4; d4 is the reference depth of the bridge; δs is the logarithmic
decrement of damping. The following values of δs shall be adopted unless appropriate values have been obtained
by measurements on bridges similar in construction to that under consideration and supported on bearings of the
same type. If the bridge is cable supported the values given shall be factored by 0.75.
Torsional motion shall be considered for all bridge types. The critical velocity shall be taken as follows.
and
but if bridges of type 3, 3A, 4 and 4A have b < 4d4, Vg shall be taken as the lesser of 20fTd4 or 5fTb. Note that fT is
the natural frequency in torsion in Hz and b is the total width of bridge.
Eurocode 1-2.4:1995 presents rules for galloping as follows.
781
Second Edition
782
Second Edition
783
Second Edition
784
Second Edition
785
Second Edition
786
Second Edition
787
Second Edition
5.4.4.2 Across-Flow Direction Classical Flutter (Divergent Amplitude Response)
Flutter occurs under combined (coupled) torsional and bending modes, whereby the reactions caused by the
torsional vibrations predominate. It occurs when for a particular phase between torsion and bending, vibrational
energy is extracted by the structure from the constant flow of air. Flutter is the oscillatory aeroelastic instability that
occurs at some airspeed at which energy extracted from the airstream during a period of oscillation is exactly
dissipated by the damping of the structure. The aerodynamic damping is a function of the reduced speed which is
defined
U
U flutter reduced speed =
fTb
where U is the wind speed, fT the torsional frequency and b the width of the bridge. Instability occurs when the
wind velocity is greater than the reduced speed AND the aerodynamic damping, A is greater than the structural
damping. This results in the critical flutter speed relationship. The motion is divergent in a range of speeds above
the critical flutter speed, here given for fT/fB > 1.2 as follows.
 f  0.72.m.r 
U flutter critical speed = η.1 +  T − 0.5 . 2 
.2.π.f B .b
 f B  π.ρ.b 
where η is the bridge profile shape factor, m is the mass/length of bridge, r the radius of gyration, b the effective
width of the bridge along the wind direction, ρ the air density. Important for avoiding flutter is the ratio of torsional
to bending natural frequencies (fT/fB). This should be as large as possible (about 3).
788
Second Edition
Experimental based expressions for lift FL and moment FM are presented.
789
Second Edition
Aerodynamic coefficients Hi* and Ai* for a thin airfoil (i = 1,2,3) and three streamlined box decks (i = 1,2,3,4) are
presented as follows.
Flutter can be avoided by choosing a suitable section. Increasing damping does not achieve the same
improvement as for vortex shedding or galloping.
The Tacoma Narrows Suspension Bridge at Washington, which opened on the 1st of July 1940, failed at a wind
speed as low as 67km/h due to flutter on the 6th of November 1940. The Tacoma Narrows Bridge consisted of two
126m towers, two 330m side spans, and a 840m main span stiffened with 2.4m deep girders with span/depth of 350
and span/width of 72. The center of the deck was rising and falling vertically by 0.9m and deflecting laterally by
0.61m. Suddenly, the bridge started twisting violently, with the deck appearing to be twisting by almost 45 degrees.
At its ultimate, 180m of the main span tore away from the suspenders, the side spans sagged and the towers tilted
3.6m towards each shore.
constraints) states that a bridge will be stable against classical flutter if the critical wind speed for bending and
torsional motion, Vf is greater than wind speed Vwo
Vr is the hourly mean wind speed.Vd is the maximum wind gust speed for the relevant maximum span; K1A is a
coefficient selected to give an appropriate low probability of occurrence of these severe forms of oscillation. For
locations in the UK, K1A = 1.25. Note that a higher value of K1A is appropriate for other climatic regions, eg.
typically K1A = 1.4 for a tropical cyclone-prone location. The critical wind speed for classical flutter is
where the reduced velocity VRf is
790
Second Edition
but not less than 2.5. Note that ρ is the density of air, b is the overall width of the bridge deck, m is the mass per
unit length of the bridge, fB the natural frequency of bridge in bending, fT the natural frequency of bridge in torsion
and r is the polar radius of gyration of the effective bridge cross section at the centre of the main span (polar second
moment of mass/mass)0.5.
Flutter analysis utilizes complex eigenvalue analysis to determine the combination of airspeed and frequency for
which neutrally damped motion is sustained.
Three methods of flutter analysis are provided in MSC.NASTRAN SOL 145, the American flutter method (called
the K method in MSC.NASTRAN), an efficient K method (called the KE method) for rapid flutter evaluations, and
the British flutter method (called the PK method) for more realistic representation of the unsteady aerodynamic
influence as frequency-dependent stiffness and damping terms. Complex eigenvalue analysis is used with the K
method, and the QR transformation method is used with the KE and PK methods.
Eurocode 1-2.4:1995 presents rules for flutter as follows.
791
Second Edition
792
Second Edition
793
Second Edition
5.4.4.2.1 American K-method
The basic equation for modal flutter analysis by the K-method is
794
Second Edition
For the K-method of solution, the aerodynamic term is converted to an equivalent aerodynamic mass
5.4.4.2.2 British PK-method
5.4.4.2.3 KE-method
795
Second Edition
5.5 GL, ML Vibration Fatigue Analysis
It has been estimated from time to time that 75% of all machine and structural failures have been caused by some
form of fatigue. It was once thought that metal becomes brittle under the action of cyclic loads. This has proved to
be incorrect. We know now that fatigue failure starts on a microscopic scale as a minute crack or defect in the
material. This gradually grows under the action of stress fluctuations because plastic deformations are not
completely reversible. The crack proceeds on planes of the greatest tensile stresses. When the crack reduces the
effective cross section to a size that cannot sustain the applied load, the component fractures in ductile failure.
Fatigue cracks initiate and grow as a result of cyclic plastic deformation. Without plasticity there can be no
fatigue failure. All attempts are made to explain how plasticity is taken into account when determining fatigue life
from linear elastic finite element analysis.
Fatigue is the failure under repeated or otherwise varying load, which never reaches a level sufficient to cause
failure in a single application. The phenomenon was discovered by August Wohler between 1852 and 1870. There
are two stages to fatigue failure. In stage I (short crack), a short crack growth occurs controlled by the maximum
shear stress i.e. the crack occurs at 45 degrees to the direction of the maximum absolute principal stress. In stage II
(long crack), a long crack occurs controlled by the maximum absolute principal stress in a direction perpendicular
to the maximum absolute principal stress. We shall only concern ourselves with the more important stage II long
crack growth.
The fatigue analysis is described for MSC.NASTRAN and the fatigue solver MSC.FATIGUE, which is within the
pre and post-processor MSC.PATRAN.
Fatigue damage would normally initiate at the surface. Hence, it is quite common to skin solid elements with a very
thin mesh of shells (of 0.01mm thickness say) to avoid stress resolution problems i.e. the inaccuracies in
extrapolating the stress results from the middle of the solid to the surfaces. In order to skin the solid mesh, the
thickness of the solid elements is reduced by the small finite thickness of the shell elements, which have the same
material property as the solids.
A uniaxial fatigue analysis involves two processes: -
I. The maximum absolute principal stress or strain field generation in the time or frequency domain
II. Fatigue analysis by either
(a) the stress life S-N (total life = crack initiation + crack propagation) approach relating local elastic
stress to fatigue life,
(b) the strain life E-N (crack initiation) approach relating local strain to fatigue life, or
(c) the crack propagation method LEFM relating the stress intensity to the crack propagation rate
The FE analysis techniques that can be used for the different life prediction methods are as follows.
Total Life Crack Initiation Crack Growth

Pseudo-static Pseudo-static Pseudo-static
Transient Transient Transient
Modal Transient Modal Transient Modal Transient
Random Frequency
Multi-axial fatigue analysis is more complicated and specialist material should be sought.
796
Second Edition
5.5.1 Maximum Absolute Principal Stress or Strain Field Generation in the Time or Frequency Domain
5.5.1.1 Choice of Analysis Method
There are 4 methods by which the stress or strain field can be generated.
I. The pseudo-static method SOL 101 is used only when the cyclic loading does not induce any
dynamic effects in the response of the structure.
II. The transient method SOL 109 can be used where dynamic effects are important on deterministic
loadings.
III. The modal superposition transient method SOL 112 performs the FE analysis on deterministic
loadings in the modal coordinates instead of the physical coordinates and hence is far more
efficient than the transient method. However, sufficient modes must be included.
IV. Finally, the frequency domain random analysis (employing SOL 108 or SOL 111) approach may
be used very efficiently if the loading is (narrowband or broadband) random, not deterministic like
a sine wave or a discernible spike.
The results of the fatigue analysis are usually requested at the nodes, not the elements.
797
Second Edition
5.5.1.2 GL, ML Pseudo-Static Analysis
The analysis procedure is described as follows: -
(i) Ensure that the maximum frequency of excitation is less than 1/3 of the first fundamental natural
frequency of the structure to justify ignoring dynamic effects
The maximum frequency of excitation is obtained from an FFT or PSD analysis of the input time
history whilst the first fundamental natural frequency of the structure is ascertained from a linear
natural modes (SOL 103) analysis. The low frequency of the excitation relative to the lowest natural
frequency would ensure that dynamic effects (dynamic amplification) do not contribute significantly to
the response of the structure to the cyclic loadings. Hence a pseudo-static based fatigue analysis would
be valid.
(ii) Perform a linear static analysis (SOL 101) with unit static loads at all DOFs with the cyclic
loading, each unit load in a separate subcase requesting the element static stress or strain
recovery
Element static stress or strain recovery is requested for each subcase for all elements in the element
coordinate system by specifying the STRESS (PLOT) or STRAIN (PLOT) command.
(iii) Perform a rotation of the nodal static stress or strain tensors from the element coordinate system
to the basic coordinate system and subsequently derive the maximum absolute static principal
stress or strain
The static stress or strain tensors are requested in the element coordinate system for each and every
element in MSC.NASTRAN. The state of static stress or strain of any element must be resolved onto
its principal plane to obtain the principal stresses or strains. In general, for a shell element, there will be
2 principal stress or strain tensors whilst a solid element will produce 3 principal stress or strain
tensors. For uniaxial fatigue analysis theory to be valid, the minimum absolute principal stresses or
strains (σ2, ε2 for shells and σ2, ε2 and σ3, ε3 for solids) be it tensile (extension) or compressive
(contraction) must be zero or negligible. This is because the cyclic variation of the minimum absolute
principal stresses or strains is not accounted for within the uniaxial fatigue analysis. Another
assumption made is that there is negligible rotation of the principal stress or strain plane of each
element throughout the variation of the cyclic loadings. In other words, the direction of the maximum
absolute principal stress or strain stays approximately constant throughout the loading history. Both of
these assumptions are usually valid because in most parts of most structures, the direction of the
maximum absolute principal stress or strain is usually constant and the minimum absolute principal
stresses or strains are usually negligible. This occurs due to the inherent dominant load path within any
part of the structure as a consequence of its geometry. MSC.NASTRAN solves for displacements at the
nodes from which the element stress or strain recovery is performed to obtain the element stresses or
strains in the corresponding element coordinate system. These stresses or strains are then extrapolated
to the nodes in the element coordinate system and are output in the .op2 file. MSC.FATIGUE is
employed to transform these nodal stress or strain results into the basic coordinate system. Then, the
maximum absolute principal stress or strain is calculated at each node within MSC.FATIGUE.
(iv) Multiply the unit load static element principal stress fields by their corresponding time histories
to obtain the element maximum absolute principal stress field variation in the time domain
798
Second Edition
5.5.1.3 GL, ML Transient Analysis
(i) Determine the maximum frequency of excitation and the first fundamental natural frequency of
the structure to ascertain if dynamic effects are significant
(ii) Perform a linear transient analysis (SOL 109 or SOL112) with the actual cyclic time signals at
the relevant DOFs as input in MSC.NASTRAN within one subcase, requesting the element time
domain stress or strain recovery
Element time domain stress or strain recovery is requested for all elements in the element coordinate
system by specifying the STRESS (PLOT) or STRAIN (PLOT) command.
(iii) Perform a rotation of the nodal time domain stress or strain tensors from the element coordinate
system to the basic coordinate system and subsequently derive the time domain maximum
absolute principal stress or strain
Two assumptions are made at this stage, first that the state of principal stresses or strains are uniaxial,
i.e. the cyclic variation of the minimum absolute principal stresses or strains are insignificant in
causing fatigue and secondly that there is negligible rotation of the principal stress or strain plane of
each element throughout the variation of the cyclic loadings. These assumptions are usually justified
due to the inherent dominant load path within any part of the structure as a consequence of its
geometry. MSC.NASTRAN solves for displacements at the nodes from which the element stress or
strain recovery is performed to obtain the element stresses or strains in the corresponding element
coordinate system. These stresses or strains are then extrapolated to the nodes in the element coordinate
system and are output in the .op2 file. MSC.FATIGUE is employed to transform these nodal stress or
strain results into the basic coordinate system. Then, the maximum absolute principal stress or strain is
calculated at each node within MSC.FATIGUE.
799
Second Edition
5.5.1.4 GL, ML Modal Superposition Transient Analysis
(ii) Perform an eigenvalue analysis requesting modal nodal stress or strain recovery within a linear
modal transient analysis SOL112 with the actual cyclic time signals at the relevant DOFs as input
in MSC.NASTRAN requesting the time domain modal responses in modal space
SOL 112
SUBCASE 1
$ Normal modes analysis to obtain the modal stress or strain field
ANALYSIS = MODES
ELSTRESS(PLOT)=ALL
STRAIN(PLOT)=ALL
$
SUBCASE 2
$ Modal transient response to obtain the modal responses in modal space
DLOAD = < ID OF TLOAD1 >
SDISPLACEMENT(PUNCH,PLOT) = ALL
For each mode, there is a modal response (in modal space) at all DOFs as a function of time. These can
be viewed in the punch file requested if intended.
(iii) From the nodal time domain stress or strain tensors in the basic coordinate system derive the
time domain maximum absolute principal stress or strain
geometry. Since this is a modal approach, MSC.NASTRAN solves for modal displacements at the
nodes from which the modal nodal stresses or strains are computed in the basic coordinate system and
stored in the .op2 file. Hence, MSC.FATIGUE does not need to be employed to transform these nodal
stress or strain results into the basic coordinate system as this has already been done. Then, the
maximum absolute principal stress or strain is calculated at each node within MSC.FATIGUE by
multiplying the modal responses (in modal space) to the mode shapes.
800
Second Edition
5.5.1.5 GL, ML Frequency Domain Stationary (and Ergodic) Random Analysis
(ii) Calculate the input PSDs and CPSDs corresponding each and every loaded DOF from the time
signals and generate the 3x3 PSD matrix
The PSD matrix is 3x3 to correspond to loadings in the three basic (global) directions.
(iii) Perform a linear frequency response analysis (SOL 108 or SOL 111) with unit harmonic loads at
all the corresponding loaded DOFs as input in MSC.NASTRAN within one subcase, requesting
the nodal stress or strain transfer function
Nodal stress or strain transfer functions are requested by specifying the STRESS (PLOT) or STRAIN
(PLOT) command. If the modal approach SOL 111 is employed, request the utilization of modes up to
at least 3 times the highest loading frequency. It is important to choose the points of the transfer
function to include points that define the natural modes of the structure well, and also those that fall in
the vicinity of points that define the prominent parts of the input PSD.
(iv) From the nodal frequency domain stress or strain transfer function in the basic coordinate
system derive the maximum absolute principal stress or strain transfer functions
geometry. In the frequency domain, MSC.NASTRAN solves for nodal stress or strain transfer function
in the basic coordinate system. Hence, MSC.FATIGUE does not need to be employed to transform
these nodal stress or strain transfer function into the basic coordinate system as this has already been
done. However, the maximum absolute principal stress or strain transfer function is calculated at each
node within MSC.FATIGUE.
(v) Multiply the input PSD matrix to the transfer function squared to obtain the response maximum
absolute principal stress or strain PSD
801
Second Edition
5.5.2 Stress-Life (S-N), Strain-Life (E-N) or Crack Propagation LEFM Uniaxial Fatigue Analysis
The S-N (total life = crack initiation + crack propagation) method is appropriate for long life (high-cycle)
fatigue problems where there is little plasticity as the method is based on nominal stresses. The S-N method does
not work well when strains have a significant plastic component, as S is the elastic stress range. Fatigue life of N
greater than 104-105 (high-cycle fatigue) can be analyzed with the S-N method. The S-N method is not suitable for
components where crack initiation or crack growth modelling is not appropriate, e.g., composites, welds, plastics,
and other non-ferrous materials. The S-N method does not account for the sequence of loading, obviously higher
stress ranges early in the life is more detrimental than later. S-N method is especially appropriate if large amounts
of S-N material data exist. On the other end of the spectrum of design philosophies is that of fail safe. This is where
a failure must be avoided at all costs. And if the structure were to fail it must fall into a state such that it would
survive until repairs could be made. This is illustrated with a stool having six legs. If one leg were to fail, the stool
would remain standing until repairs could be made. This philosophy is heavily used in safety critical items such as
in the aerospace or offshore industries.
The E-N (crack initiation) method is appropriate for fatigue life of N less than 104-105 (low-cycle fatigue). It can
also be used for long life (high-cycle) fatigue problems. The E-N method is appropriate for most defect free
metallic structures and components where crack initiation is important. It is appropriate for components that are
made from metallic, isotropic ductile materials which have symmetric cyclic stress-strain behavior. The safe life
philosophy is a philosophy adopted by many, but especially the ground vehicle industry. Products are designed to
survive a specific design life. Full scale tests are usually carried out with margins of safety applied. In general, this
philosophy results in fairly optimized structures such as a stool with three legs. Any less than three legs and it
would fall over. This philosophy adopts the crack initiation method and is used on parts and components that are
relatively easy and inexpensive to replace and not life threatening if failure were to occur. Most of the life is taken
up in the initiation of a crack. The propagation of that crack is very rapid and short in comparison.
The crack propagation method is appropriate for pre-cracked structures or structures which must be presumed to
be already cracked when manufactured such as welds. It is useful for pre-prediction of test programs to avoid
testing components where cracks will not grow and for the planning inspection programs to ensure checks are
carried out with the correct frequency. It is beneficial to simply determine the amount of life left after crack
initiation. Again it is appropriate only for components that are made from metallic, isotropic ductile materials
which have symmetric cyclic stress-strain behavior. The middle ground philosophy is that of damage tolerance.
This philosophy, adopted heavily in the aerospace community and nuclear power generation, relies on the
assumption that a flaw already exists and that a periodic inspection schedule will be set up to ensure that the crack
does not propagate to a critical state between inspection periods. As implied, this philosophy adopts the crack
growth method. This is illustrated using our stool (now with four legs) but with someone inspecting it. This
particular design philosophy is generally used in conjunction with the fail safe philosophy, first to design for no
failure, and then to assume that, for whatever reason, a flaw exists and must be monitored.
802
Second Edition
5.5.2.1 Stress-Life (S-N) (Total Life) Uniaxial Fatigue Analysis
Stress life (S-N) prediction is appropriate for high endurance fatigue, i.e. fatigue failures that occur from about
104-105 cycles to infinity. On a double logarithmic plot logS vs logN, most steels and ferrous alloys exhibit a
horizontal line below which the metal cannot be fractured by fatigue, known as the fatigue or endurance limit. For
ferrous alloys with strength below 1400MPa, the endurance limit is approximately half its ultimate strength.
The endurance limit for ferrous alloys with an ultimate strength above 1400MPa is approximately 700MPa, i.e. that
is the limitation. In addition to this, the stress at 103 cycles, S3, can be approximated by 0.9Su.
Using the Goodman relationship (for mean tensile stress correction) and knowing the endurance limit, it can be
quickly ascertained if fatigue would be an issue or not. Unlike steel, aluminium does not show an endurance
limit.
S refers to the stress range whilst N refers to the number of cycles to failure. The S-N curve should always be
quoted with the corresponding probability of failure, 0% and 50%. Knowing just the 50% probability of failure S-N
curve is meaningless as there is no information of the scatter of results. The S-N curve should correspond to the
material M-S-N and not the component, the latter of which is usually referred to as the C-S-N curve. Unlike the C-
S-N curve, the M-S-N curve is independent of the test specimen. Only 2 parameters are required to define the M-S-
N curve, namely m and k. Usually the double logarithmic curve is used and so the log S versus log N plots straight
lines.
Log S
Sut NSm = K
hence, log N + m log S = log K
1 1
log S = − log N + log K
m m
Low Cycle
High Cycle
Log N
103-104 106-107
As mentioned, fatigue cannot occur without some local plasticity. The S-N method makes no effort to define the
amount of plasticity or compensate for it in any specific manner. All plasticity is built into the S-N curve itself.
Part features that produce stress concentrations greatly reduce the fatigue life. The stress concentration factor is
Kt (geometry based). In the FE model, Kt = 1 if the stress concentrations is due to a geometry such as a hole that is
explicitly modeled. Otherwise, a non-unity value of Kt should be applied.
803
Second Edition
The fatigue concentration factor is Kf (material based). This is similar to the stress concentration, Kt, except it
accounts for the fact that small notches have less effect on fatigue than is indicated by Kt. This has led to the idea of
a fatigue concentration factor, Kf, which is normally less than Kt, being introduced and being used to replace Kt. Kf
is related to Kt according to
where p’ is a material constant dependent on grain size and strength and r is the notch root radius.
The presence of residual compressive stresses on the surface if a metal has been shown to be a very successful
method of improving fatigue endurance. On the other hand, the presence of residual tensile stresses on the surface
has a very detrimental effect. Other factors that affect fatigue life worth bearing in mind are temperature effects,
corrosion and surface finish and conditioning. Tests on a number of aluminium or steel alloys ranging down to –
50 degrees have shown little affect on the fatigue life. On the other hand, at temperature in excess of 400 degrees,
there is a rapid fall in fatigue strength. Corrosion lowers fatigue life considerably. Corrosion is a process of
oxidation, and under static conditions a protective oxide film is formed which tends to retard further corrosion.
However, with cyclic loading, the protective coating is ruptured in every cycle allowing further corrosion. The
combined effects of corrosion and fatigue can be quite detrimental. Fatigue failures in metals almost always
develop at a free surface. Hence the surface finish and conditioning has a significant effect on the fatigue life. A
polished surface finish is much better than a rough machined surface since this reduces the mild stress
concentrations at the surface. The hardening conditioning processes increase fatigue strength whilst plating and
corrosion protection tends to diminish fatigue strength.
In TIME DOMAIN solutions, the static response must be added to the dynamic response if the dynamic analysis
is performed about the initial undeflected (by the static loads) state with only the dynamic loads applied, hence
causing the dynamic response to be measured relative to the static equilibrium position. Hence, the total response
= the dynamic response + the static response to static loads. Alternatively, in TIME DOMAIN solutions, if
the dynamic analysis is performed with the deflected static shape as initial input and the static loads maintained
throughout the dynamic excitations, the total or absolute response (static and dynamic) is obtained straight away
from the dynamic analysis. Hence total response = dynamic response (which already includes the static
response to static loads). Either way, the mean of the response must be ascertained in order to perform mean stress
correction.
The time domain (including the pseudo-static) fatigue analysis is summarized as follows: -
(i) Perform rainflow cycle counting (Matsuishi and Endo) on the irregular sequence yielding the stress
range S, number of cycles n over the duration of the time signal (hence n in Hertz or cycles per
second), and the mean for each bin.
(ii) Perform mean (tensile) stress correction on the stress range of each bin using the Goodman straight
line, the Gerber parabola or Soderberg straight line on plots of stress amplitude versus mean stress.
804
Second Edition
Gerber is the upper bound whilst Goodman is the lower bound. Goodman is the most commonly
employed. Soderberg is a more conservative line for design purposes using a yield stress Sy instead of
the tensile strength Su in the Goodman relationship. It can be concluded that an increase in tensile mean
stress in the cycle reduces the allowable range of stress. Compressive mean stress appear to cause little
or no reduction in stress range and some materials even show an increase. Hence, it is also usual to
assume no mean stress correction for compressive stresses as a conservative approximation as
compression aids in protecting against fatigue failure.
σ a = stress amplitude
σ m = mean stress
S u = ultimate tensile strength
S e = equivalent stress for σ m = 0
Graphically this looks like the plot below, at least for Goodman, if you draw a line connecting Su to the
intersection of σa and σm and then continue it on to the stress amplitude axis, this will indicate the
equivalent stress Se with zero mean. This stress is then used to look up damage on the S-N curve using
the Palmgren-Miners rule.
The method employed for mean stress correction is usually Goodman. This relation is good for fracture
fatigue. If yield is to be used as the failure criterion, the Soderberg relation which replaces Su with the
tensile yield Sy is used.
(iii) Employ the Palmgren-Miners rule and the constant amplitude fully reversed (i.e. zero-mean as
mean stress correction already accounted for by Goodman, Gerber or Soderberg) S-N curve to
estimate the damage and hence life (reciprocal of damage). The Palmgren-Miner hypothesis suffers
from the fact that it does not take the sequence of loading into account. Obviously larger stress
ranges early in the life of the structure would be more detrimental than later.
n
Failure occurs when Damage = ∑ N = 1.0
The units of n is Hz or cycles per second. N is in cycles. Hence damage as calculated from the
Palmgren-Miner equation will be in per seconds. Thus, the life, which is the reciprocal of damage, will
be in seconds.
In FREQUENCY DOMAIN solutions, not only that the static response has to be added separately, but also the
mean of the dynamic excitation has also got to be added separately as a static response. This is because the mean of
the dynamically applied force is not included in the dynamic excitations. Hence the total response in this
frequency domain dynamic analysis = static response to mean of dynamic excitation + dynamic response +
static response to static loads. The mean response thus has to be identified from the fluctuating response.
805
Second Edition
The frequency domain random fatigue analysis is summarized as follows: -
(i) Perform equivalent rainflow cycle counting (to generate the PDF) on the response PSD. The
intensity of the signal is given by the RMS. The number of cycles per second is given by the number of
peaks per second, E[P] (peaks/s), function of the moments of the PSD. The total number of cycles, St is
S t = E[P].T
Hence the number of cycles for a particular stress range is the probability (from the integral of the
PDF) multiplied by the total number of cycles
number of cycles = (p(S).dS).S t
Thus, the number of cycles per second for the particular stress range, ni is given by
n i = (p(S).dS).S t / T
= (p(S).dS).E[P]
The frequency content or bandedness (in effect the distribution of cycles) of the random PSD needs to
be quantified in order to choose and justify the correct method of generating the PDF. This can be done
by calculating irregularity factor, γ or by the Dirlik rainflow cycle distribution, both of which is a
function of four moments of the PSD namely m0, m1, m2 and m4.
Performing a frequency domain random analysis on a deterministic (as opposed to narrowband or

broadband random) signal is very conservative. For instance, the PSD of a sine wave with an amplitude
of say 140MPa is simply a spike. We know that the RMS of the sinusoidal time signal is 0.7071 times
the amplitude, hence 100MPa. This RMS will be represented by the area of the PSD. We also know
that generating a random time signal from a PSD will predict a peak amplitude of 3 (to 4.5) times the
RMS, hence 300MPa here. This is because the amplitude distribution of a narrow or broadband signal
is Gaussian. This is much higher than the 140MPa value of the original signal. Thus the frequency
domain approach will be conservative as the greatest damage in a fatigue analysis will be produced by
the large stress ranges even with a relatively low number of cycles.
If we have a narrowband process, all we really need is the RMS to perform a fatigue calculation. The
narrowband solution is traditionally the method employed to ascertain the distribution of the cycles.
J.S. Bendat (1964) developed the theoretical basis for the so called Narrow Band solution. However, the fact
that this solution was suitable only for a specific class of response conditions was an unhelpful limitation for
the practical engineer. This was the first frequency domain method for predicting fatigue damage from
PSDs and it assumes that the PDF of peaks is equal to the PDF of stress amplitudes.
The Narrow Band solution was then obtained by substituting the Rayleigh PDF of peaks with the PDF
of stress ranges. The fact that the fatigue PDF is stress range and the Rayleigh PDF is the peak is
accounted for.
The Rayleigh is actually only a function of the RMS and hence just of m0 as RMS = √m0. The
narrowband solution is however very conservative (approximately by 100 times) for broadband
processes as it assumes that all positive peaks are matched with corresponding troughs of similar
806
Second Edition
magnitude. The problem with this solution is that by using the Rayleigh PDF, positive troughs and
negative peaks are ignored and all positive peaks are matched with corresponding troughs of similar
magnitude regardless of whether they actually form stress cycles. For wide band response data the method
therefore overestimates the probability of large stress ranges and so any damage calculated will tend to
be conservative. This is illustrated below.
The above figure shows two time histories. The narrow band history is made up by summing two
independent sine waves at relatively close frequencies, while the wide band history uses two sine
waves with relatively widely spaced frequencies. Narrow banded time histories are characterized by the
frequency modulation known as the beat effect. Wide band processes are characterized by the presence
of positive troughs and negative peaks and these are clearly seen in the overhead as a sinusoidal ripple
superimposed on a larger, dominant sine wave. The problem with the narrow band solution is that
positive troughs and negative peaks are ignored and all positive peaks are matched with corresponding
troughs of similar magnitude regardless of whether they actually form stress cycles. To illustrate why
the narrow band solution becomes conservative with wide band histories, take every peak (and trough)
and make a cycle with it by joining it to an imaginary trough (peak) at an equal distance the other side
of the mean level. This is shown in the bottom graph. It is easy to see that the resultant stress signal
contains far more high stress range cycles than were present in the original signal. This is the reason
why the narrow band solution is so conservative.
For broadband signals, Dirlik has produced an empirical closed form expression for the PDF of
rainflow ranges, which was obtained using extensive computer simulations to model the signals using
the Monte Carlo technique. This equation has been found to be a widely applicable solution which
consistently out performs all of the other available methods.
807
Second Edition
Since Bendat first derived the narrow band solution a number of methods have been derived in order to
improve on its short comings. Tunna and Wirsching solutions are both, effectively, corrected versions
of the narrow band approach. Tunna’s equation was developed with specific reference to the railway
industry. Wirsching’s technique was developed with reference to the offshore industry, although it has
been found to be applicable to a wider class of industrial problems. The Chaudhury and Dover, and
Hancock solutions were both developed for the offshore industry. They are both in the form of an
equivalent stress parameter. Neither tend to work well when used for other industrial problems.
Furthermore, the omission of rainflow cycles from the solution output for both approaches is a further
limitation. The Steinberg solution method is used by the electronics industry in the USA.
808
Second Edition
The approach of Steinberg leads to a very simple solution based on the assumption that no stress cycles
occur with ranges greater than 6 rms values. The distribution of stress ranges is then arbitrarily
specified to follow a Gaussian distribution.
Note that the PDF predicts 68.3% time at 2 rms, 27.1% time at 4 rms, and 4.3% time at 6 rms. It is possible
to define the maximum stress range used in the subsequent fatigue analysis. If this is set at 6 rms it is
possible to see that large stress ranges are omitted using this approach. MSC.FATIGUE will set this
value automatically, if not over ridden, to be somewhere around 9 rms for stress range! Anything less
than this is likely to result in an under prediction of fatigue damage. Of course this is counter balanced
by the fact that medium range stress cycles of levels between 4 and 6 rms are over predicted.
Nevertheless it must be stated that this approach is very questionable. It is included only as a means of
allowing designers in the electronics industry, who are used to the Steinberg approach, a means of
comparison.
(ii) Mean (tensile) stress correction cannot be accounted with the PSD method as the PSD contains not
any mean.
(iii) Employ the Palmgren-Miners rule. Failure occurs when

ni
Damage = ∑ N(Si )
= 1.0
Employing the S-N curve,

K
N(S i ) = m
S
the damage, D is calculated as follows
ni
Damage, D = ∑ N(S i )
E[P] m
=
K ∫S p(S)dS
809
Second Edition
The units of n is Hz or cycles per second. N is in cycles. Hence damage as calculated from the
Palmgren-Miner equation will be in per seconds. Thus, the life, which is the reciprocal of damage, will
be in seconds.
A good method to check whether a PSD has been specified correctly from a time signal is to perform a fatigue
analysis with the PSD as the response PSD in the frequency domain, doing the equivalent rainflow count (with the
Dirlik algorithm) and comparing the stress-life results with a fatigue analysis in the time domain with the time
signal. The rainflow count can also be compared. This checking method will verify that the time signal is random,
Gaussian and stationary. Alternatively, as done usually for any random analysis, the PSD can be converted back
into the time signal and the statistics of the new signal compared with that of the original signal.
An example of a hand-based random frequency domain fatigue analysis is presented. Consider a typical steel S-
N curve.
The idealized response stress PSD is as follows.
The statistics of the PSD are derived.
Two hand methods can be used to approximate the frequency domain random fatigue analysis. One is used when
the PSD is narrowbanded and the other used when the PSD is broadbanded. For a narrowband approximation, an
equivalent solitary sinusoidal wave is derived from the RMS, i.e.
810
Second Edition
Equivalent Sinusoidal Wave Range = √2 x 112 x 2 = 315 MPa.
Hence,
n E[P] 9.807 9.807 cycles / s
D= ∑ N =  3728  1 / 0.238
=
 3728 
1 / 0.238
=
32292.2 cycles
   
 S   315 
= 3.04 x10 − 4 per second
Thus, the life which is the reciprocal is 3293s or 0.92 hours.
For a broadbanded approximation,

Equivalent 1Hz Sinusoidal Wave Range = √2 x √10000 x 2 = 283 MPa.
Equivalent 10Hz Sinusoidal Wave Range = √2 x √2500 x 2 = 141 MPa.
Hence, noting that n corresponds to the frequency of the waves, namely 1Hz and 10Hz,
n 1 Hz 10 Hz
D= ∑ =
N  3728 1 / 0.238
+
 3728 
1 / 0.238
= 1.9743x10 −5 + 1.0571x10 −5
  cycles   cycles
 283   141 
= 3.0314 x10 −5 per second
Thus the life is 32987s or 9.2 hours.
The broadbanded approximation is better since the 1Hz and 10Hz is well separated. Note that the foregoing
two hand approximations of the PSD with deterministic signals is not necessarily conservative or
unconservative, but simply approximations. Contrast with the aforementioned fact that representing a
deterministic signal with a PSD and performing a narrowband or broadband solution is conservative, and
also performing a narrowband solution on a broadband PSD is also conservative.
With the rigorous computational method, using the damage expression

ni
Damage, D = ∑
N(S i )
E[P].T m
=
K ∫
S p(S)dS
the Narrow Band solution gives life of 0.41 hours (cf. hand based 0.92 hours) and the Dirlik gives life of 2.13 hours
(cf. hand based 9.2 hours).
811
Second Edition
5.5.2.2 Strain-Life (E-N) (Crack Initiation) Uniaxial Fatigue Analysis
Strain life (E-N) prediction is appropriate for low endurance fatigue, i.e. fatigue failures that occur before 104-105
cycles. Low cycles to failure does not necessarily mean a short design life because the frequency of cyclic loading
can be small. For instance, an aircraft fuselage is only pressurized once every flight and so it will take years to
accumulate 104-105 cycles. Failure at low endurance results from stresses and strains that are high and will result in
marked plastic deformation (hysteresis) in every cycle. Hence, strain-life methods are useful when cycles have
some plastic strain component.
The E-N curves are related to the plastic strain range εp. This is also the width of the hysteresis loop. The E-N
relationship of the following form applies for most metals up to 105 cycles.
εpNα = k
A log εp versus log N graph plots a straight line. The constant α is between 0.5 and 0.6 for most metals at room
temperature.
6 parameters are required to fully define the E-N curve.
With linear finite element analysis, Neuber’s rule can be employed to account for nonlinear stress strain material
curves in the fatigue analysis.
The strain-life fatigue analysis can be performed in the time (not frequency) domain.
812
Second Edition
5.5.2.3 Crack Propagation LEFM Uniaxial Fatigue Analysis
The crack propagation fatigue analysis is more complicated and specialist material should be sought. The crack
propagation fatigue analysis can be performed in the time (not frequency) domain
813
Second Edition
5.5.3 Stress-Life (S-N), Strain-Life (E-N) or Crack Propagation LEFM Multi-axial Fatigue Analysis
Multi-axial fatigue analysis is more complicated and specialist material should be sought.
814
Second Edition
5.6 GL, ML Passive Structural Motion Control
Methods of passive structural motion control are: -

i. Optimum stiffness and mass distribution
ii. Isolation systems
iii. Optimum damping distribution
iv. Tuned mass damper systems
5.6.1 Optimum Stiffness and Mass Distribution
5.6.1.1 Concepts of Forced Frequency Response of Deterministic Periodic Harmonic Load Excitations
In a modal forced frequency response analysis, the modal response in modal coordinates ξi and the modal response
in physical coordinates ui(t) are
p p 2ζ i ω / ω ni
ξ i (ω) = D i (ω) 0i e − iθi = D i (ω) 2 0i e − iθi , θ i = tan −1
Ki ω ni M i ( )
1 − ω 2 / ω ni
2
{u i ( t )} = Re al [{φ i }ξ i (ω)e iω t
]
The relative importance of each mode is encapsulated in the values of the modal responses ξi. However, the
physical response effects can be more critical from less significant modes (i.e. with lower modal responses)
due to the inherent shape of the eigenvector even if the scaling factor (i.e. the modal response) is smaller. The
following parameters are of particular interest in controlling the modal response: -
I. The modal mass and (the amplitude of the) modal force must be considered together as their
magnitudes are related to the arbitrary normalization of φi. MAX normalization scales the
eigenvectors such that their maximum component is unity and all other components less than unity.
The relative magnitude of the modal mass between different modes scaled by MAX is not in itself an
indication of the relative importance of the particular mode as that also depends on the magnitude
and location of the applied load excitation, given by the amplitude of the modal force. To reduce the
modal response ξi, the modal mass should be maximized AND the amplitude of the modal force
should be minimized. The modal mass will be maximized if there is more structural mass in the
mode, hence the heavier the structure, the greater shall be the modal mass of most modes, and the
lower the modal response. The amplitude of the modal force will be minimized if the amplitude of
the applied force is minimized and if the location of the applied force corresponds to the DOF
with smaller components of the eigenvector. This is obvious from a physical viewpoint, as clearly
the modal response should be greater if the excitation is applied at the maximum locations of the
eigenvector. With MAX normalization, the value of the modal mass is still of significance. A graph
of (MAX normalized) modal mass versus modal frequency is most illustrative of the global and local
modes. The greater the modal mass, the lower will be the response assuming constant amplitude of
modal force. A very small modal mass (several orders of magnitude smaller than that of other
modes) obtained from MAX normalization indicates a local mode or an isolated mechanism. If the
applied force were to be located at the mechanism, the amplitude of the modal force may be
significant, and hence so may the modal response. If the distribution of mass is uniform, then
higher modes of the same type (for instance higher bending modes relative to the fundamental
bending mode) MAY have the same MAX normalized modal masses (simply supported beam
modal masses 0.5mL and cantilever beam modal masses 0.25mL). However other types of global
modes of higher frequency than the fundamental frequency may have lower modal masses. For
instance, the first torsional mode of a tower, which may be of a higher natural frequency than the first
bending mode, may have a lower modal mass. This means that higher frequency global modes can
also be significantly excited if the applied force was such that it corresponded to the greater values of
their eigenvector.
815
Second Edition
250.000

Bending Modes
200.000
Modal Mass (Tonnes)

175.000
150.000
100.000
75.000
50.000 Cable Modes
25.000
0.000
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50
Mode Number
Hence, the modal masses of each and every mode are values that can be compared if all the modes
had the same amplitude of modal force. The amplitude of the modal force for each and every mode
can be made to be the same if there is only one concentrated applied force at one DOF and if the
POINT normalization corresponding to that DOF is used for all modes. POINT normalization allows
the user to choose a specific DOF at which the modal displacements are set to 1 or –1. Hence, the
amplitude of the modal force for all modes will be the same and only the modal mass need to be
compared. In this case, there will be significant difference in the order of magnitude of different
global modes. The higher the modal mass with this method, the lower shall be the modal response.
However, this normalization is not recommended because for complex structures, the chosen
component may have very small values of displacement for higher modes causing larger numbers to
be normalized by a small number, resulting in possible numerical roundoff errors and ridiculously
higher modal masses. For instance, if the POINT normalization points to a DOF component which
does not really exist in a particular mode, than all the other eigenvector terms will be normalized by a
very small number, which will certainly result in numerical errors.
II. For ANY natural mode, the (magnitude of the) dynamic amplification factor, Di(ω) becomes infinite
or is limited only by the modal damping of the particular mode when the excitation frequency
approaches the natural frequency of the mode. The higher the modal damping, the lower the
(magnitude of the) modal dynamic amplification factor, Di(ω). Hence, the modal amplification can
be reduced by either mistuning the frequencies of excitation and the modal natural frequencies
or by increasing the modal damping. Dimax occurs when ω/ωn = (1-2ζ2)1/2.
Variation of D with Frequency Ratio For Diffe rent

Damping
6
zhi=0 1
5 D i (ω) =
Dynamic Amplification
;
4 zhi=0.1
(1 − ω 2
/ ω ni )
2 2
+ (2ζ i ω / ω ni )
2
Factor, D
3 zhi=0.2
1
zhi=1 D i max =
( )
2
1 zhi=2 2ζ 1 − ζ 2
0
0 1 2
Frequency Ratio ω / ω n
816
Second Edition
III. Higher modes are less significant then lower modes because of the higher natural frequency ωni2 in
the expression for the modal response ξi.
Hence, in order to reduce the total steady-state response (by controlling the distribution of mass, stiffness and
damping) to a fixed frequency and amplitude of excitation, the following may be undertaken.
I. The structural mass distribution, stiffness distribution and boundary conditions are modified so
that there are no natural frequencies close to the frequency of excitation (and causing resonance) in
order to minimize the (magnitude of the) dynamic amplification factor, Di(ω). If the lowest natural
frequency can be made significantly greater than the excitation frequency, then all the natural modes
respond in a quasi-static manner to the excitation, and thus the response will only be dependent upon
the amplitude of excitation as the frequency is low enough to be considered static. If this cannot be
done, the natural modes should be tuned such that the excitation frequency is much greater than the
lower natural frequencies. The response of the lower modes will be governed by inertial forces (the
response of which is even lower than the quasi-static response) and the (magnitude of the) dynamic
amplification factor, Di(ω) will be minimized. However, Di(ω) of higher modes will be more
significant. But since ωni2 features in the denominator of the modal response expression ξi, the higher
modes will produce a lower modal response (although the modal physical response could be
significant) when resonated.
II. The mass distribution of the structure is increased in order to increase the modal masses
(specifically of the modes with significant modal response ξi, but generally all), which in turn
reduces the modal response ξi. This however will lower the natural frequencies and will affect the
(magnitude of the) dynamic amplification factor, Di(ω) of I.
III. The stiffness distribution of the structure is increased in order to increase the natural frequencies
ωni2 (specifically of the modes with significant modal response ξi, but generally all), which feature in
the denominator of the modal response ξi expression. This will however affect the (magnitude of the)
dynamic amplification factor, Di(ω) of I.
IV. The boundary conditions of the structure are altered in order to increase the natural frequencies ωni2
(specifically of the modes with significant modal response ξi, but generally all), which feature in the
denominator of the modal response ξi expression. This will however affect the (magnitude of the)
dynamic amplification factor, Di(ω) of I.
V. The location and direction of the applied load excitation is modified to not correspond to the large
locations of the modes with significant modal response ξi in order to reduce the amplitude of the
modal force, which in turn will reduce the modal response ξi.
VI. The damping distribution is modified such as to maximize the modal damping of the modes with
significant modal response ξi. This is done in order to minimize the (magnitude of the) dynamic
amplification factor, Di(ω) and hence minimizing the modal response ξi. If resonance is unavoidable,
damping should be incorporated, as it is most efficient at resonance. For the design of explicit
dampers, it is necessary to find the location and range of the damping parameter for optimum
damping of a particular mode. The optimum location will clearly be at the position of the maximum
components of the eigenvector. Optimum values of the viscous damping coefficient c (Ns/m) depend
on the optimum modal damping obtained for a particular range of damping constant. There is always
a plateau where the values of the damping constant c will give the optimum (highest) modal
damping. This plateau range is obtained computationally by running repetitive complex modal
analysis (MSC.NASTRAN SOL 107) with varying damping constants, and observing the range
which gives the optimum damping for the structural mode that is to be damped.
817
Second Edition
5.6.1.2 Concepts of Forced Transient Response of Deterministic Load Excitations
In a modal forced transient response analysis, the modal response in modal coordinates ξi and the modal response
in physical coordinates ui(t) are
p p
ξ i ( t ) = D i ( t ) 0i = D i ( t ) 2 0i
Ki ω ni M i
{u i ( t )} = {φ i }ξ i ( t )
The relative importance of each mode is encapsulated in the values of the modal responses ξi. However, the
physical response effects can be more critical from less significant modes (i.e. with lower modal responses)
due to the inherent shape of the eigenvector even if the scaling factor (i.e. the modal response) is smaller. The
following parameters are of particular interest in controlling the modal response: -
I. The modal mass and (the amplitude of the) modal force must be considered together as their
magnitudes are related to the arbitrary normalization of φi. MAX normalization scales the
eigenvectors such that their maximum component is unity and all other components less than unity.
The relative magnitude of the modal mass between different modes scaled by MAX is not in itself
an indication of the relative importance of the particular mode as that also depends on the
magnitude and location of the applied load excitation, given by the amplitude of the modal force.
To reduce the modal response ξi, the modal mass should be maximized AND the amplitude of the
modal force should be minimized. The modal mass will be maximized if there is more structural
mass in the mode, hence the heavier the structure, the greater shall be the modal mass of most
modes, and the lower the modal response. The amplitude of the modal force will be minimized if
the amplitude of the applied force is minimized and if the location of the applied force
corresponds to the DOF with smaller components of the eigenvector. This is obvious from a
physical viewpoint, as clearly the modal response should be greater if the excitation is applied at
the maximum locations of the eigenvector. With MAX normalization, the value of the modal mass
is still of significance. A graph of (MAX normalized) modal mass versus modal frequency is most
illustrative of the global and local modes. The greater the modal mass, the lower will be the
response assuming constant amplitude of the modal force. A very small modal mass (several orders
of magnitude smaller than that of other modes) obtained from MAX normalization indicates a local
mode or an isolated mechanism. If the applied force were to be located at the mechanism, the
amplitude of the modal force may be significant, and hence so may the modal response. If the
distribution of mass is uniform, then higher modes of the same type (for instance higher
bending modes relative to the fundamental bending mode) MAY have the same MAX
normalized modal masses (simply supported beam modal masses 0.5mL and cantilever beam
modal masses 0.25mL). However other types of global modes of higher frequency than the
fundamental frequency may have lower modal masses. For instance, the first torsional mode of a
tower, which may be of a higher natural frequency than the first bending mode, may have a lower
modal mass. This means that higher frequency global modes can also be significantly excited if the
applied force was such that it corresponded to the greater values of their eigenvector.
818
Second Edition
250.000

Bending Modes
200.000
Modal Mass (Tonnes)

175.000
150.000
100.000
75.000
50.000 Cable Modes
25.000
0.000
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50
Mode Number
Hence, the modal masses of each and every mode are values that can be compared if all the modes
had the same amplitude of modal force. The amplitude of the modal force for each and every mode
can be made to be the same if there is only one concentrated applied force at one DOF and if the
POINT normalization corresponding to that DOF is used for all modes. POINT normalization allows
the user to choose a specific DOF at which the modal displacements are set to 1 or –1. Hence, the
amplitude of the modal force for all modes will be the same and only the modal mass need to be
compared. In this case, there will be significant difference in the order of magnitude of different
global modes. The higher the modal mass with this method, the lower shall be the modal response.
However, this normalization is not recommended because for complex structures, the chosen
component may have very small values of displacement for higher modes causing larger numbers to
be normalized by a small number, resulting in possible numerical roundoff errors and ridiculously
higher modal masses. For instance, if the POINT normalization points to a DOF component which
does not really exist in a particular mode, than all the other eigenvector terms will be normalized by a
very small number, which will certainly result in numerical errors.
II. In general, Di(t) is a function of the natural circular frequency ωni2 = Ki/Mi or the damped natural
circular frequency ωd, the time duration of loading td and the general time t. For a SDOF system,
Dimax can be found by differentiation and is a function of the natural circular frequency ωni2 = Ki/Mi
or the damped natural circular frequency ωd and the time duration of loading td. A graph of Dimax
versus td / Ti is extremely illustrative of the maximum amplification that can be achieved for a
particular type of impulsive loading.
Response Spectrum
2.5
1.5
Dimax
0.5
0
0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 4 4.5
td/T i
819
Second Edition
The above shows that the maximum dynamic amplification that can be produced from short duration
impulse loadings is two! Maximum amplifications of higher modes are represented by points to the
right of that for the fundamental mode.
On inspection of the red curve representing the ramp up load in duration td, it is apparent that when
the ramp is of a shorter duration td than the fundamental period T1 (i.e. td/T1 < 1.0), the amplification
is large decreasing from 2.0 to 1.0 (no dynamic amplification) when the duration equals the period.
Higher modes are less amplified as td/Ti becomes larger. If the duration is larger than the
fundamental period (i.e. td/T1 > 1.0), the amplification will be small. The yellow curve with a large
duration is simply a special case of the red curve with an instantaneous ramp (i.e. td/T1 = 0.0), hence
causing a dynamic amplification of 2.0. In conclusion, if the ramp is such that it is gradual
enough to be at least equal to the period of the fundamental mode (i.e. td/T1 > 1.0), the
amplification can be minimized.
On inspection of the green curve representing the impulsive loads, if the duration of the impulse td is
close to the period of the fundamental mode T1, the amplification is large (~1.5). Higher modes are
less amplified as td/Ti becomes larger. If the duration is much smaller than the fundamental period
(td/T1 < ~0.4), the amplification is less than unity, and hence not even the static response is observed
as the impulse to too fast for the structure to react. If the duration is much larger than the
fundamental period (td/T1 > 2.0), the amplification is small. The yellow curve with a small duration is
simply a special case of the green curve with an instantaneous impulse (i.e. td/T1 < ~0.2), hence
causing a dynamic amplification of less than 1.0 (i.e. less than static response). In conclusion, if the
impulsive load is much smaller in duration (td/T1 < ~0.4) or much larger in duration (td/T1 >
2.0) compared to the fundamental mode T1, the amplification can be minimized.
The fact that impulsive loads cause little amplification can also be quantified more directly than
employing the dynamic amplification. The response from a true impulse (t1/T < ~0.2) is readily
obtained as the unit impulse function can be brought outside the Duhamel’s or Convolution Integral.
The maximum modal response (not the dynamic amplification Di(t)) from an impulsive load (t1/T <
0.2), can be obtained simply as follows.
τ= t
ξ i (τ = t ) = h(t - τ) ∫τ= 0
p(τ)dτ
1 τ= t
ξ i max =
M i ω ni ∫
τ= 0
1 τ= t
ξ i max =
M i ω di ∫
τ= 0
φ i p(τ)dτ damped
The above expression may seem to differ from the dynamic amplification approach where the
denominator contains the modal stiffness, i.e. modal mass times the square of the natural circular
frequency. This is because the above expression requires the explicit integration of the forcing
function. The dynamic amplification approach differs in the sense that the integral (i.e. Duhamel’s
Integral) is already classically integrated to obtain the expression D(t). Another equivalent
interpretation of the above relationship is from the basic consideration of the conservation of
momentum. The impacting particle (of small relative mass compared to mass of structure) imposes
an impulse I onto the structure. The magnitude of I can be calculated as m∆v where m is the small
mass and ∆v the change of velocity at impact. If there is no rebound ∆v is the approach velocity.
Conservation of momentum at impact requires the initial velocity of the structural mass to be I/M. A
lightly damped system then displays damped free vibration with an initial displacement of
820
Second Edition
approximately I/(ωdM), or an initial velocity of approximately I/M or an initial acceleration of

approximately Iωd/M.
The general derivation of the impulse force is a science in itself. Simple considerations can however
result in good approximations. As mentioned, an impacting particle (of small relative mass compared
to mass of structure) imposes an impulse I = F∆t = m∆v onto the structure, where m and ∆v are
known. Knowing that F∆t is the area under the impulse curve, making an estimate of the shape of the
impulse curve and the duration ∆t, we can thus estimate the peak amplitude. Hence, the impulse
curve is defined.
Hence, if the structure is tuned such that the period of the fundamental mode is much less than
the duration of the impulse (t1/T < 0.2), the amplification will be very low and can readily be
ascertained using the above relationship. Of course, higher modes may be amplified more than
the fundamental mode but would respond less because of the larger natural frequency ωni2.
III. Higher modes are less significant then lower modes because of the higher natural frequency ωni2 in
the expression for the modal response ξi.
Hence, in order to reduce the total (starting transient and steady-state) response (by controlling the distribution of
mass, stiffness and damping) to a ramped up loading or impulsive excitation, the following may be undertaken.
I. The structural mass distribution, stiffness distribution and boundary conditions are modified to
minimize the dynamic amplification factor of the fundamental mode, D1(t). Higher modes may have
a greater dynamic amplification. But since ωni2 features in the denominator of the modal response
expression ξi, the higher modes will produce a lower modal response (although the modal physical
response could be significant).
II. The mass distribution of the structure is increased in order to increase the modal masses
(specifically of the modes with significant modal response ξi, but generally all), which in turn
reduces the modal response ξi. This however will lower the natural frequencies and will affect the
dynamic amplification factor, Di(t) of I.
III. The stiffness distribution of the structure is increased in order to increase the natural frequencies
ωni2 (specifically of the modes with significant modal response ξi, but generally all), which feature in
the denominator of the modal response ξi expression. This will however affect the dynamic
amplification factor, Di(t) of I.
IV. The boundary conditions of the structure are altered in order to increase the natural frequencies ωni2
(specifically of the modes with significant modal response ξi, but generally all), which feature in the
denominator of the modal response ξi expression. This will however affect the dynamic amplification
factor, Di(t) of I.
V. The location and direction of the applied load excitation is modified to not correspond to the large
locations of the modes with significant modal response ξi in order to reduce the amplitude of the
modal force, which in turn will reduce the modal response ξi.
821
Second Edition
5.6.1.3 Concepts of Forced Frequency Response of Deterministic Periodic Harmonic Base Excitations
For a SDOF system subjected to base harmonic excitations u0sinωt, in absolute terms the response would be
u 0 1 + (2ζω / ω n )
2
2ζω / ω n
u (t) = sin (ωt + β − θ ) θ = tan −1
(1 − ω 2 ω 2n ) 2 + ( 2ζω / ω n ) 2 (1 − ω 2 ω 2n )
Defining an expression for the relative transmissibility as the displacement response amplitude divided by the
amplitude of the enforcing harmonic displacement u0,
1 + (2ζω / ω n )
2
Tr =
(1 − ω 2 ω 2n ) 2 + ( 2ζω / ω n ) 2
This is the displacement transmissibility expression. The acceleration transmissibility is exactly similar. A plot of
Tr versus ω/ωn is somewhat similar to that of (magnitude of the) dynamic amplification D versus ω/ωn, except that
all the curves of different ζ pass through the same point of Tr = 1.0 when ω/ωn = √2. Noting the curves after this
point it is observed that damping tends to reduce the effectiveness of vibration isolation for frequency ratios greater
than √2.

6
zhi=0
5
zhi=0.1
4 zhi=0.2
zhi=0.3
3
zhi=0.4
2 zhi=1.0
zhi=2.0
1
0
0 1 2
822
Second Edition
5.6.1.4 Concepts of Forced Transient Response of Deterministic Base Excitations
In a modal enforced motion transient response analysis, the modal response in modal coordinates ξi and the modal
response in physical coordinates ui(t) are
p 0i {φ }T [M ]{1}&
u&0 &
u&
ξ i (t) = D i (t) = −D i (t) i 2 = D i (t )Γi 20
Ki ω ni M i ω ni
{φ i }T [M ]{1} {φ i }T [M ]{1}
where Γi = − =−
Mi {φ i }T [M ]{φ i }
{u i ( t )} = {φ i }ξ i ( t )
Thus whereby we had the following for the modal response in load excitations
p {φ } {p }
T
ξ i ( t ) = D i ( t ) 0i = D i ( t ) i 2 0
Ki ω ni M i
we now have the following for enforced base motion
p 0i {φ } [M ]{1}&
T
u&0
ξ i (t) = D i (t) = −D i (t) i 2
Ki ω ni M i
An exceptionally crucial observation is that whereby for load excitations the amplitude of the forcing vector {p0}
may be sparse with only possibly one point with a value, that for enforced motion is quite different [M]{1} & u&0 with
all components having a value. Thus, the enforced motion amplitude of modal force is special in the sense that the
loading is uniformly distributed. Hence, higher modes will have lower amplitude of modal force because the
positive and negative terms in the mode shape will cancel in the expression of the modal force. Thus, higher
modes will have a lower overall contribution (but inter-storey response may be significant). This does not generally
occur for load excitations, unless the loading is uniformly distributed. To reiterate, higher modes in load excitations
may well be significant if the location of the excitation is such that it corresponds to the greater components of the
eigenvector and hence making the modal force is prominent. On the contrary, higher modes in base excitations will
not be significant (to the total base shear but may well be significant for inter-storey response) because of the
distributed nature of the forcing vector, canceling positive and negative terms in the eigenvector and making the
modal force not prominent.
Because of the fact that the enforced based motion acceleration induces a force proportional to the mass and the
base acceleration, clearly, higher masses would induce a greater force upon the structure.
In enforced motion, the modal participation factor is defined and is analogous to the ratio of the load excitation
amplitude of modal force p0i but bereft of or normalized by the amplitude of the loading vector p0 divided by
the modal mass Mi.
823
Second Edition
5.6.1.5 Concepts of Forced Transient Response (Response Spectrum Analysis) of Random Non-Stationary
Base Excitations
The maximum modal response in modal space for mode i is computed as follows
ξ& ( t ) = Γ S
i max i V
&
The maximum modal responses in physical space for mode i is then computed as follows
{u imax (t)} = {φ i }ξ i max ( t ) = {φ i }Γi S D

{u& (t)} = {φ }ξ& ( t ) = {φ }Γ S
imax i i max i i V
u&imax (t)} = {φ i }&

{& ξ&i max ( t ) = {φ i }Γi S A
An interesting point that could be made is the difference between the response spectrum method and the response
due to enforced motion based on the dynamic amplification method. The maximum modal response from enforced
base motion based on the dynamic amplification is
&
u&0
ξ i max ( t ) = D i max (t )Γi
ω 2ni
Comparing, hence the spectral displacement is
&
u&0
S D = D i max (t )
ω 2ni
824
Second Edition
5.6.2 Optimum Damping Distribution
Damping can often be ignored for short duration loading such as crash impulses or shock blast because the
structure reaches peak before significant energy has had time to dissipate. Damping is important for long duration
loadings such as earthquakes, wind and loadings such as rotating machines, which continually add energy to the
structure and is especially critical when the response at resonance is to be established, for it is only the damping
which balances the externally applied force as the potential energy (stiffness) and the kinetic energy (mass) cancel
each other. Two mathematical formulations of damping exist, namely
(i) viscous damping c(du/dt), which is proportional to the response velocity (hence proportional to
the forcing frequency), and
(ii) structural damping iGku, which is proportional to the response displacement (hence independent
of the forcing frequency)
The choice of the damping formulation should depend on the actual real world damping mechanism that is to be
modeled. However, it is often the case that the formulation adopted is dependent upon that which can be handled
by the dynamic solution algorithm. Viscous damping can be incorporated in both time and frequency domain
solutions schemes whilst structural damping can only be incorporated in frequency domain solution schemes.
The structural and viscous damping can be incorporated at 3 different levels, namely elemental, modal and global
levels.
5.6.2.1 Elemental Damping Mathematical Models
Elemental damping damps all the structural modes of vibration accurately for all excitation frequencies irrespective
of whether they are at resonance with the mode or not. Equivalent elemental damping introduces approximations.
5.6.2.1.1 Elemental Viscous Damping
This damping formulation can be implemented in the time domain (SOL 109, SOL 112, SOL 129) or in the
frequency domain (SOL 108, SOL 111) with CDAMP, CVISC, CBUSH or CBUSH1D elements. It will damp
all the structural modes of vibration accurately (obviously some modes will be damped more than others) for
all excitation frequencies irrespective of whether they are at resonance with the mode or not.
The viscous damper is a device that opposes the relative velocity between its ends with a force that is proportional
to velocity. The elemental viscous damping force is given by
fd = c u&
The user specifies the elemental damping constant c in Ns/m, which is constant in a CDAMP, CVISC, CBUSH or
CBUSH1D element.
A material is considered to be elastic when the stresses due to an excitation are unique functions of the associated
deformation i.e. τ = Geγ. Similarly, a material is said to be viscous when the stress state depends only on the
deformation rates i.e. τ = Gv γ&. Assuming no slip between the shear strain is related to the plunger motion by
where td is the thickness of the viscous layer. Letting L and w represent the initial wetted length and width of the
plunger respectively, the damping force is equal to
825
Second Edition
Substituting for τ
Finally, for fd = c u&
The design parameters are the geometric measures w, L and td and the fluid viscosity, Gv.
For analysis, it is necessary to

(i) find the value of the damping parameters in practice to put into a computational model
(ii) verify the damping parameters in the time or frequency domain computational model.
These can be done by evaluating the response stress-strain curve of the element. The area under its response
stress-strain curve represents the energy dissipated in an element.
The displacement, velocity, acceleration and force are instantaneous quantities. Depicted for a SDOF system, if we
know its velocity at any instant of time, the damping force at that instant is equal to the damping constant c
multiplied by the velocity. Energy dissipated on the other hand is a cumulative quantity; hence the instantaneous
force must be multiplied with an instantaneous differential displacement and summed over all the differential
displacements. In the frequency domain, the energy dissipated by viscous damping during one cycle of harmonic
vibration of forcing excitation p0sinωt is equal to the damping force multiplied the differential displacement,
integrated over the single period of vibration. Hence,
p0 / k
Displacement response amplitude, D(ω)p 0 / k =
(1 − ω2 ω2n ) 2 + ( 2ζω / ωn ) 2
Displacement response u p ( t ) = D(ω) p 0 / k sin (ωt − θ)
Velocity response u&p ( t ) = D(ω)ωp 0 / k cos(ωt − θ)
Force response = cu&p ( t )
t =2π / ω
Energy dissipated in one harmonic cycle of ω, E d = ∫
t =0
cu&p ( t )du
t =2π / ω du
= ∫
t =0
cu&p ( t )
dt
dt
t =2π / ω
=∫ cu&p ( t )dt
2
t =0
t =2π / ω
=∫ c(D(ω)ωp 0 / k cos(ωt − θ )) dt
2
t =0
t =2π / ω
= c(D(ω)p 0 / k ) ω2 ∫ cos 2 (ωt − θ )dt
2
t =0
π
= c(D(ω)p 0 / k ) ω2
2
ω
= πωc(D(ω)p 0 / k )
2
826
Second Edition
The energy dissipated per cycle is directly proportional to the damping coefficient c, square of the response
amplitude û and proportional to the driving frequency ω.
Ed = πωc û 2
And the viscous damping coefficient is
1 ∆W 1 E d
ζ= =
4π W 4π W
Shock absorbers in vehicle suspensions are viscous dampers. Fluid is forced through orifices located in the piston
head as the piston rod position is changed, creating a resisting force which depends on the velocity of the rod. The
damping coefficient can be varied by adjusting the control valve.
Radiation damping is a viscous damping mechanism occurring due to pressure wave radiation into medium
surrounding the structure. This is a very efficient form of energy dissipation mechanism. If a plane wave is
considered, then the energy transferred from the structure to the fluid per unit area per cycle is
Ed = πωρc(D(ω)p0/k)2
Equating the energy dissipated per harmonic cycle for viscous damping and radiation damping,
Ed viscous = πωc(D(ω)p0/k)2 = Ed radiation = πωρv(D(ω)p0/k)2
c = ρv
For a radiation plane wave, the viscous damping c per unit surface area of the structure is ρv where ρ is the density
and v the speed of sound in the medium into which the structure propagates the energy. Radiation into solid
medium thus gives a high value for this damping and hence accounts for most of foundation damping in buildings.
It is also an efficient mechanism for structures surrounded in liquid.
For design, it is necessary to

(i) find the range of the damping parameter for optimum damping of a particular mode
For the design of explicit dampers, it is necessary to find the location and range of the damping parameter
for optimum damping of a particular mode. The optimum location will clearly be at the position of the
maximum components of the eigenvector. Optimum values of c depend on the optimum modal damping
obtained for a particular range of damping constant. There is always a plateau where the values of the
damping constant c will give the optimum (highest) modal damping. This plateau range is obtained
computationally by running repetitive complex modal analysis (MSC.NASTRAN SOL 107) with varying
damping constants, and observing the range which gives the optimum damping for the structural mode that
is to be damped.
5.6.2.1.2 Elemental Structural Damping
This damping formulation can be implemented ONLY in the frequency domain (SOL 108, SOL 111) on the
MAT1 card or using CELAS or CBUSH elements. It will damp all the structural modes of vibration
accurately (obviously some modes will be damped more than others) for all excitation frequencies
irrespective of whether they are at resonance with the mode or not.
The structural damping force is proportional to displacement and is in phase with velocity. The structural damping
force is given by
fd = iGEku
In the frequency domain, the user specifies the damping loss factor GE and k in a MAT1, CELAS or CBUSH
element.

827
Second Edition
It can be shown that the energy dissipated in one harmonic cycle of ω by a structural damping element is
Ed = πGEk û 2
Structural damping is actually a general friction damping mechanism which allows for a variable magnitude of
the friction force since it is proportional to the response displacement. This is contrasted with the less general
friction damping mechanism i.e. Coulomb damping where the magnitude of the friction force is constant and
limited.
5.6.2.1.3 Elemental Equivalent Viscous Damping for Structural Damping
There no reason to implement this damping formulation in the frequency domain as elemental structural
damping can be specified instead. It can be implemented in the time domain (SOL 109, SOL 112, SOL 129)
on the MAT1 card or using CELAS or CBUSH elements, all with the specification of the ‘tie in’ frequency
PARAM, W4. If PARAM, W4 is not specified, no equivalent viscous damping for structural damping will be
implemented. This damping formulation will NOT damp any of the structural modes of vibration accurately
except the solitary ‘tied in’ mode that will be damped accurately ONLY when the excitation frequency
matches its natural frequency (i.e. at resonance). Hence, this damping formulation should NOT be used, a
modal approach should be used for the time domain instead.
Structural damping needs to be converted to equivalent viscous damping for solutions in the time domain by
dividing the structural damping by the excitation frequency.
1
f d = G E ku&
ω
Although this equivalence can be implemented exactly in the frequency domain with the frequency dependent
damping capability of the CBUSH element, this is unnecessary as structural damping can be defined in the
frequency domain anyway. In the time domain, this requires the definition of a ‘tie in’ forcing frequency, chosen to
correspond to a structural mode that is most prominent for the response (i.e. that which shows the greatest modal
response with respect to time, a characteristic that can be obtained using SDISP, SVELO or SACCE in the modal
solution), i.e. ω = ω1. Hence, in the time domain, the user specifies the GE, k and ω1 from which c = GEk /ω1 in a
MAT1, CELAS or CBUSH element, all with PARAM, W4.
1
fd = G E ku&
ω1
The equivalence is obtained by equating the energy dissipated per harmonic cycle for viscous damping and
structural damping as follows.
Ed viscous = πωc(D(ω)p0/k)2 = Ed structural = πGEk(D(ω)p0/k)2
ceq = GEk / ω
828
Second Edition
5.6.2.1.4 Elemental Equivalent Viscous Damping for Velocity-Squared Damping
This damping formulation can be implemented approximately in the frequency domain (SOL 108, SOL 111)
with CBUSH elements. It can be implemented approximately in the time domain (SOL 109, SOL 112) with
CDAMP, CVISC, CBUSH or CBUSH1D elements. It should not be used in a nonlinear time domain solution
(SOL 129) as the nonlinear (velocity squared) viscous damping can be modeled exactly in the nonlinear
solution scheme with CBUSH1D elements.
Velocity-squared damping is directly proportional to the square of the velocity and opposes the direction of motion.
f d = au&2
In a nonlinear time domain solution SOL 129, the user specifies ‘a’ in CBUSH1D. In the frequency domain SOL
108 and SOL 111, the user specifies ‘a’, variable ω and a constant displacement response amplitude û from which
ceq = (8/3π)a û ω in an excitation frequency dependent CBUSH.
8
fd = aûωu&
3π
In the linear time domain SOL 109 and SOL 112, the user specifies ‘a’, a constant displacement response amplitude
û and a constant forcing frequency ω, the latter of which is chosen to correspond to a structural mode that is most
prominent for the response (i.e. that which shows the greatest modal response with respect to time, a characteristic
that can be obtained using SDISP, SVELO or SACCE in the modal solution), i.e. ω = ω1 from ceq = (8/3π)a û ω1 in
a CDAMP, CVISC, CBUSH or CBUSH1D element.
8
fd = aûω1 u&
3π

The equivalence is obtained by equating the energy dissipated per harmonic cycle for viscous damping and
velocity-squared damping as follows. For a linear viscous damper, the steady-state energy dissipated during one
harmonic cycle is
Ed = πcω û ²
where û is the amplitude of steady-state displacement, and ω is the excitation frequency i.e. the steady state
response frequency. For a linearized velocity squared damper, steady-state energy dissipated during harmonic cycle
Ed = (8/3)aω² û ³
where a is the velocity-squared damping constant (Ns2/m2), and û is the amplitude of the steady-state displacement
response. By equating the dissipated energies, the equivalent viscous damping coefficient for the velocity-squared
damper is ceq = (8/3π)a û ω.
Industrial hydraulic dampers are velocity-squared dampers. Velocity squared damping models the behavior
observed when systems vibrate in fluid or when a fluid is rapidly forced through an orifice.

For the design of explicit dampers, it is necessary to find the location and range of the damping parameter
for optimum damping of a particular mode. The optimum location will clearly be at the position of the
maximum components of the eigenvector. Optimum damping constant ‘a’ can be obtained from repetitive
SOL 129 analyses. Alternatively, assuming û and choosing ω = ω1 so that ceq = (8/3π)a û ω1, repetitive SOL
107 can be run for numerous ‘a’ values and hence ceq, until the optimum damping plateau is obtained.
829
Second Edition
5.6.2.1.5 Elemental Equivalent Viscous Damping for Coulomb Damping
This damping formulation can be implemented approximately in the frequency domain (SOL 108, SOL 111)
with CBUSH elements. It can be implemented approximately in the time domain (SOL 109, SOL 112) with
CDAMP, CVISC, CBUSH or CBUSH1D elements. It should not be used in a nonlinear time domain solution
(SOL 129) as the damping can be modeled exactly in the nonlinear solution scheme with the CGAP (contact
and) friction element.
It is assumed that the (constant and limited) force resisting the direction of motion is proportional to the normal
force FN between the sliding surfaces, independent of the magnitude of velocity but is in phase with the velocity
(hence the sign of velocity term).
where F is the limiting Coulomb force magnitude and is equal to µFN where FN is the normal contact force and µ
the coefficient of friction. In a nonlinear time domain solution SOL 129, the user specifies the coefficient of
friction, µ in a CGAP contact-friction element. In the frequency domain SOL 108 and SOL 111, the user specifies
µ, FN, variable ω and variable û from which c is calculated from ceq = 4µFN/(πω û ). Due to the nature of the
Coulomb force being in phase with the velocity, an equivalent viscous damping model can easily be used in a
CBUSH element.
4µFN
fd = u&
πωû
where FN is the normal force, µ the coefficient of friction and û the harmonic response amplitude. In the linear
time domain SOL 109 and SOL 112, a constant displacement response û and forcing frequency ω is required, the
latter of which is chosen to correspond to a structural mode that is most prominent for the response (i.e. that which
shows the greatest modal response with respect to time, a characteristic that can be obtained using SDISP, SVELO
or SACCE in the modal solution), i.e. ω = ω1. In the time domain, the user specifies µ, FN, ω1 and û from which
ceq = 4µFN/(πω1 û ) in a CDAMP, CVISC, CBUSH or CBUSH1D element.
4µFN
fd = u&
πωû

The energy dissipated is proportional to the friction force and the amplitude of vibration as follows.
Ed = 4µFN û
Coulomb damping or dry friction damping is found wherever sliding friction is found in machinery, laminated
springs or bearings. Coulomb damping is also used to model joint damping mechanisms. Joint damping is found
in highly assembled structures.
830
Second Edition
5.6.2.1.6 Elemental Equivalent Structural Damping for Hysteretic Damping
MAT1 card or using CELAS or CBUSH elements. It will damp all the structural modes of vibration
accurately (obviously some modes will be damped more than others) for all excitation frequencies
irrespective of whether they are at resonance with the mode or not. It should not be used in a nonlinear time
domain solution (SOL 129) as the damping can be modeled exactly in the nonlinear solution scheme with an
elastic-plastic hysteretic material model MATS1 (TYPE PLASTIC).
The form of the damping force-deformation relationship depends on the stress-strain relationship for the material
and the make-up of the device. For an elastic-perfectly plastic material, the limiting values are Fy, the yield force,
and uy, the displacement at which the material starts to yield; kh is the elastic damper stiffness. The ratio of the
maximum displacement to the yield displacement is referred to as the ductility ratio and is denoted by µ. In a
nonlinear time domain solution SOL 129, the user specifies the initial stiffness kh, the yield force Fy and the
ductility ratio µ or the ultimate strain in a MATS1 (TYPE PLASTIC). In the frequency domain SOL 108 and SOL
111, the user specifies the equivalent structural damping loss factor GE for the hysteretic damper as
GE = 2(µ−1)
where µ is the ductility ratio in a MAT1, CELAS or CBUSH element.

The work per cycle for hysteretic damping is
Hysteretic damping is due to the inelastic deformation of the material composing the device. Hysteretic damping
is also offered by hysteretic damper brace elements.

For the design of explicit hysteretic damper brace elements, it is necessary to find the location and range of
the damping parameter for optimum damping of a particular mode. The optimum location will clearly be at
the position of the maximum components of the eigenvector. Optimum ductility ratio µ can be obtained from
repetitive SOL 129 analyses. Alternatively, assuming repetitive SOL 107 can be run for numerous GE values
and hence µ, until the optimum damping plateau is obtained.
831
Second Edition
5.6.2.1.7 Elemental Equivalent Structural Damping for Viscoelastic Damping
CBUSH elements or in SOL 108 with MAT1 and TABLEDi (with the SDAMPING Case Control Card). It
should not be used in a nonlinear time domain solution (SOL 129) as the damping can be modeled exactly in
the nonlinear solution scheme with the CREEP material model.
Viscoelastic materials are characterized by the shear modulus G (which relates to a stiffness k) and the loss factor,
GE both of which are temperature, strain and frequency dependent.
The ratio
is the shear loss tangent. A material is considered to be elastic when the stresses due to an excitation are unique
functions of the associated deformation i.e. τ = Geγ. Similarly, a material is said to be viscous when the stress state
depends only on the deformation rates i.e. τ = Gv γ&.
An elastic material responds in phase with excitation whilst a viscous element responds 90 degrees out of phase.
Hence a viscoelastic element responds 0 – 90 degrees out of phase with the excitation. In the frequency domain
SOL 108 and SOL 111, the user specifies the excitation frequency dependent stiffness, k(ω) and the excitation
frequency dependent loss factor, GE(ω) in a CBUSH element. Alternatively in SOL 108,
SDAMPING = n to reference TABLEDi Bulk Data entry
MAT1 with G = GREF (reference modulus) and GE = gREF (reference element damping)
A TABLEDi Bulk Data entry with an ID = n is used to define the function TR(f)
A TABLEDi Bulk Data entry with an ID = n+1 is used to define the function TI(f)
where the stiffness matrix of the viscoelastic elements

832
Second Edition
Viscoelastic damping is present in most materials, albeit at very small levels. This is of course present in both the
elastic and plastic range of the material deformation and their values are presented below.
Material Loss Factor, GE

Steel 0.001 – 0.008
Cast iron 0.003 – 0.03
Aluminium 0.00002 – 0.002
Lead 0.008 – 0.014
Rubber 0.1 – 0.3
Glass 0.0006 – 0.002
Concrete 0.01 – 0.06
Viscoelastic damping is utilized in constrained layer damping for structural and aeronautical applications.
Examples include SUMITOMO-3M, SWEDAC and bituthene. This method works best when the constrained layer
is put into shear and therefore the most effective location of such a layer is at the neutral axis of the floor beam or
slab where the complementary shear stresses are high. Typical visco-elastic materials are fairly flexible and can
exhibit significant creep. Therefore introduction of a constrained layer means that the structure is more flexible
than it would be if it were monolithic. For static loads therefore these types of layers are not ideal, and so a
compromise must often be reached. Constrained layer damping has quite often been applied to excessively lively
existing structures by adding an extra “cover plate” on top of or beneath the existing floor in order to constrain a
layer of visco-elastic material.
Slab
Truss end
The stiffness k of a (zero-length two orthogonal horizontal direction) spring representing an area A of viscoelastic
constrained layer material is AG/t where t is the thickness and G the shear modulus. The variation of G and the loss
factor GE with temperature, excitation frequency has been established for bituthene.
Temperature has dramatic effect on G but little on GE. The material properties to use based on interpolation of test
results at 20 °C and a frequency of 5Hz are thus
Shear Modulus G = 1.17 MPa
Loss factor GE = 0.75 (at very small strains)

Optimum damping parameters k and GE can be obtained from repetitive SOL 107 analyses, until the
optimum damping plateau is obtained. For constrained layer viscoelastic damping, repetitive SOL 107 can
be run until the value of k (and hence the thickness t since k = AG/t) that yields the optimum damping is
obtained.
833
Second Edition
5.6.2.2 Modal Damping Mathematical Models
Modal damping damps all the structural modes of vibration specified with a modal damping accurately at
all excitation frequencies irrespective of whether they are at resonance with the mode or not. Equivalent
modal damping damps the structural modes of vibration specified with a modal damping accurately ONLY
when the excitation frequency matches the frequency of each particular natural mode.
Note that the modal damping approach will not be valid if the modes are significantly complex, i.e. different parts
of the structure are out-of-phase (reaching their maximum at different instances) in a particular mode as the modal
damping values are applied on the real modes. Damping elements with high values of damping can result in the
structure having totally different damped modes of vibration. For instance, a cable with a damper element with a
very high damping coefficient attached to its center will behave as two separate cables, the damper element
effectively producing a fixity at the center of the cable. This changes the fundamental mode shape of the cable from
one of a low frequency to two cable mode shapes of higher fundamental frequency.

(ii) obtain modal damping values from a set of explicit element dampers
There are various methods of obtaining the modal damping coefficients in practice and from finite element models
damped with individual explicit viscous or structural damping elements. Complex modal analysis (SOL 107) can
be performed to ascertain the structural modal damping coefficients Gi for each and every mode. Alternatively, a
forced frequency response analysis (SOL 108 or SOL 111) can be performed with a harmonic loading from
which the modal damping coefficient can be ascertained in a variety of methods from the FRF. The methods of
obtaining the damping from the FRF are: -
(i) the half-power bandwidth method which approximates the modal damping in lightly-damped structures (ζ
< 0.1) where the ith modal damping coefficient is
f i 2 − f i1
ζi =
2f i
where fi1 and fi2 are the beginning and ending frequencies of the half-power bandwidth defined by the
maximum response divided by √2. The half-power bandwidth method assumes a SDOF response.
(ii) the (magnitude of the) dynamic amplification factor at resonance method
1
= Dynamic Amplification Factor At Resonance of ith mode, D i resonant
2ζ i
Maximum Displacement Response Amplitude of ith mode, D i resonant p 0 /k
=
Static Displacement Response Amplitude, p 0 /k
Another method of obtaining modal damping estimates is the logarithmic decrement method. In order to obtain
the values of ζi, a transient analysis (SOL 109, SOL 112, SOL 129) can be performed and successive peaks can be
observed from the free vibration response. The free vibrational analysis can be set up using an initial displacement
condition or an impulsive force that ramp up and down quickly with respect to the dominant period of the response
and/or other natural frequencies of interest. The logarithmic decrement, δ is the natural log of the ratio of amplitude
of two successive cycles of free vibration. Then the damping ratio is
δ
ζ≈
2π
The logarithmic decrement method assumes a SDOF response. Modal damping of higher modes requires signal
filtering of the response time history.
834
Second Edition
5.6.2.2.1 Modal Viscous Damping
This damping formulation can be implemented in the modal time domain (SOL 112) with the SDAMPING
Case Control Command and the TABDMP1 entry. It can also be implemented in the modal frequency
domain (SOL 111) with SDAMPING Case Control Command, the PARAM, KDAMP and the TABDMP1
entry. It will damp all the structural modes of vibration specified with a modal damping value accurately for
all excitation frequencies irrespective of whether they are at resonance with the mode or not.
The damping force is given by

f id = ζ i ( 2M i ω n i ) (iωξ i (ω))
The user specifies ζi.
5.6.2.2.2 Modal Structural Damping
This damping formulation cannot be implemented in the modal time domain (SOL 112). It can be
implemented in the modal frequency domain (SOL 111) with the SDAMPING Case Control Command, the
PARAM, KDAMP and the TABDMP1 entry where it will damp all the structural modes of vibration
specified with a modal damping value accurately for all excitation frequencies irrespective of whether they
are at resonance with the mode or not.
The damping force is given by

f id = iG i K i ξ i (ω)
The user specifies Gi.
5.6.2.2.3 Modal Equivalent Viscous Damping for Modal Structural Damping
There no reason to implement this damping formulation in the modal frequency domain as modal structural
damping can be specified instead. It can be implemented in the modal time domain (SOL 112) with the
SDAMPING Case Control Command and the TABDMP1 entry. This damping formulation will damp all
modes specified with a modal damping value accurately ONLY when the excitation frequency matches the
natural frequency of the particular mode (i.e. at resonance), often an acceptable approximation.
This modal damping formulation is extremely useful in modelling structural damping in time domain solutions.
Time domain solutions, be they direct or modal cannot handle structural damping. Incorporating elemental
structural damping within a time domain solution requires a ‘tie in’ frequency, hence damping the different modes
inaccurately. The best method would be to use a modal approach, i.e. SOL 112 where modal damping can be
specified and internally automatically converted into modal viscous damping. All the modes are then damped
accurately when the excitation frequency matches the natural frequency of the particular mode. Again, the method
works if the modes are only slightly complex, as the modal damping estimates are applied onto the real modes.
The following presents the appropriate conversion between modal viscous and modal structural damping. It will be
shown that the two forms of damping are only theoretically equivalent when the forcing frequency ω equals the
natural frequency of the structural mode of vibration ωn. This is proven mathematically and pictorially below
showing the variation of viscous and structural damping with forcing frequency.
835
Second Edition
fd Viscous
damping
Structural
damping
Forcing
frequency, ω
ω = ωn
For the viscous damping force to equal the structural damping force
f viscous = f structural
cu&= iGku
icωu = iGku
The damping constant c is specified as a percentage of critical damping ζ of a particular structural mode
iω(ζ2mωn)u = iGku
ω(ζ2mωn) = Gk
If and only if ω = ωn
ωn(ζ2mωn) = Gk
ζ2mωn2 = Gk
ζ2mk / m = Gk
ζ=G/2
Although the two damping formulations are only identical the resonances ω = ωn and not for other forcing
frequencies, damping is most critical at resonance when ω ≈ ωn (when the inertial and stiffness forces cancel) and
so the switch between viscous and structural formulations is often acceptable in practice. Whenever possible, the
damping formulation chosen (i.e. whether viscous or structural) should be such as to simulate the actual real-world
damping mechanism. Nevertheless, the use of viscous damping to simulate structural damping (and vice versa for
that matter) is possible, but it must be borne in mind that the conversion is only accurate at resonance when the
structural modal frequencies equal the forcing frequencies. From above, it is obvious that the use of a viscous
damping formulation to represent a structural damping mechanism will overestimate damping when the forcing
frequency ω is higher than ωni and underestimate damping when the forcing frequency ω is lower than ωni.
Conversely, the use of a structural damping formulation to represent a viscous damping mechanism will
underestimate damping when the forcing frequency ω is higher than ωni and overestimate damping when the
forcing frequency ω is lower than ωni.
836
Second Edition
5.6.2.3 Global Damping Mathematical Models
Global damping formulations are the crudest method of modelling damping. This method does not damp all the
natural modes accurately because it is often based on the damping estimates of either one or two modes only. These
modal estimates are obtained using methods of obtaining modal damping values described previously.
5.6.2.3.1 Global Viscous Damping (Mass Proportional Damping)
The global (mass proportional) viscous damping force is given by

[F]d = [C]{u&}
= α[ M ]{u&}
= ζ i 2ω ni [M ]{u&}
The user specifies α.
The values of ζi and ωni are based one mode only, usually the first fundamental mode which usually dominates the
response. Hence, the method tends to underestimate damping in modes of higher than ωni frequencies and
overestimate damping in modes of lower than ωni frequencies.
Fd Viscous damping Fd
Underestimated
Overestimated
Modal frequency, ωni

ωni
5.6.2.3.2 Global Structural Damping
This damping formulation can ONLY be implemented in the frequency domain (SOL 108, SOL 111) using
PARAM, G. It will damp all the structural modes of vibration accurately (obviously some modes will be
damped more than others) for all excitation frequencies irrespective of whether they are at resonance with
the mode or not if and only if all the deformable elements have associated structural damping of the same
value.
The global structural damping force is given by
[F]d = iG[K ]{u}

The user specifies G.
5.6.2.3.3 Global Equivalent Viscous Damping for Structural Damping (Stiffness Proportional Damping)
There no reason to implement this damping formulation in the frequency domain as elemental structural
damping and/or modal structural damping can be specified instead. It can be implemented in the time
domain (SOL 109, SOL 112, SOL 129) using PARAM, G with the specification of the ‘tie in’ frequency
PARAM, W3. If PARAM, W3 is not specified, no equivalent viscous damping for structural damping will be
implemented. This damping formulation will NOT damp any of the structural modes of vibration accurately
837
Second Edition
except the solitary ‘tied in’ mode that will be damped accurately ONLY when the excitation frequency
matches its natural frequency (i.e. at resonance). Hence, this damping formulation should NOT be used, a
modal approach should be used for the time domain instead.
The global (stiffness proportional) viscous damping force is given by

[F]d = β[K ]{u&}
2ζ i
= [K ]{u&}
ω ni
The user specifies β.
The values of ζi and ωni are based one mode only, usually the first fundamental mode which usually dominates the
response. Hence, the method tends to overestimate damping in modes of higher than ωni frequencies and
underestimate damping in modes of lower than ωni frequencies.
Fd
Underestimated
Overestimated
Viscous damping Fd
Modal frequency, ωni
ωni
This method is crudely used to model the structural damping mechanism in a global viscous formulation. This is so
because, from the above equation
[F]d = β[K ]{u&}
2ζ i
= [K ]{u}iω
ω ni
When ω = ω ni
[F]d = i2ζ i [K ]{u}
= iG i [ K ]{u}
As mentioned, a viscous formulation to model structural damping will overestimate damping when the forcing
frequency ω is higher than ωni and underestimate damping when the forcing frequency ω is lower than ωni. This is
even more exaggerated here as the damping estimate is based upon just one mode.
5.6.2.3.4 Global Equivalent Viscous Damping for Viscous and Structural Damping (Mass and Stiffness
Proportional Rayleigh Damping)
The Rayleigh proportional viscous damping force is given by
[F]d = [α[M] + β[K]]{u&}

The user specifies α and β.
838
Second Edition
The factors α and β are chosen to give the correct damping at two excitation frequencies. For a specified damping
factor ζ at an excitation frequency ω then
1α 
ζ=  + βω 
2ω 
And using this at 2 frequencies ωr and ωs with the required damping factors ζr and ζs respectively gives
ζ s ω r − ζ r ωs
α = 2ω r ω s
ω 2r − ω s2
ζ r ω r − ζ s ωs
β=2
ω 2r − ω s2
The method is based on the damping coefficients ζr and ζs of two distinct modes ωr and ωs. By specifying ζr = ζs,
all structural natural modes between modal frequencies ωr and ωs will have damping less than at modes ωr and ωs.
Fd
Viscous damping Fd
Modal frequency, ωn
ωr ωs
5.6.2.4 Damping Formulation Conclusions
The choice of using a viscous damping formulation or a structural damping formulation should depend on the
actual real world damping mechanism being modeled. Elemental damping formulations damp all modes accurately
at all excitation frequencies. If an equivalent elemental damping formulation is used, then not all natural modes will
be damped accurately. Modal damping formulations damp all modes specified with a modal damping accurately at
all excitation frequencies. Equivalent modal damping formulations damp all modes specified only when the
excitation frequency matches the natural frequency of the mode. The use of a modal viscous damping formulation
to represent a modal structural damping mechanism will overestimate the modal damping when the forcing
frequency ω is higher than ωni and underestimate the modal damping when the forcing frequency ω is lower than
ωni. Conversely, the use of a modal structural damping formulation to represent a modal viscous damping
mechanism will underestimate the modal damping when the forcing frequency ω is higher than ωni and
overestimate the modal damping when the forcing frequency ω is lower than ωni. Global proportional damping will
damp only one or two structural modes accurately. Global mass proportional viscous damping tends to
underestimate damping in modes of higher than ωni frequencies and overestimate damping in modes of lower than
ωni frequencies. Global structural damping will damp all modes accurately at all excitation frequencies if all the
deformable elements exhibit structural damping of the same value. Global stiffness proportional viscous damping
tends to overestimate damping in modes of higher than ωni frequencies and underestimate damping in modes of
lower than ωni frequencies. Global Rayleigh damping can be made, by specifying ζr = ζs, to damp all modes
between modal frequencies ωr and ωs to have damping less than at modes ωr and ωs.
839
Second Edition
5.6.3 GL, ML Base Isolation Systems
Base isolation systems are used to minimize the effect of seismic support motion on structures and
nonstructural elements and to reduce machine induced loadings on foundations.
5.6.3.1 Controlling Displacement Response From Harmonic Load Excitations
We reiterate that the dynamic amplification factor D(ω) for applied harmonic loading p0sinωt on a SDOF system is
Variation of D with Frequency Ratio For Diffe rent
Damping
6
5 zhi=0
Dynamic Amplification
1
zhi=0.1 D i (ω) = ;
(1 − ω )
4
+ (2ζ i ω / ω ni )
2 2
Factor, D
/ ω ni
2 2
3 zhi=0.2
2 zhi=1 1
D i max =
1
0
zhi=2
(
2ζ 1 − ζ 2 )
0 1 2
Frequency Ratio ω / ω n
The corresponding maximum displacement response of the SDOF system is umax = Dimax(p0/k). Dimax occurs when
ω/ωn = (1-2ζ2)1/2. Clearly, if ωn is flexible (i.e. low) enough such that D(ω) is less than unity (the exact location
varies with the amount of damping, being at ω/ωn = 1.4 for ζ = 0.0), the steady-state dynamic response will be less
than the static response and the externally applied harmonic dynamic load excitation is well controlled for the
displacement response.
5.6.3.2 Controlling Acceleration Response From Harmonic Load Excitations
Now, it may also be desirable to limit the maximum acceleration amplitude. The acceleration response is simply
the second derivative (with respect to time) of the displacement response. Hence the maximum acceleration
response will be amax = ω2Dimax(p0/k) = (ω/ωn)2Dimax(p0/m).
ω /ω
Variation of (ω ω n)^2.D(ω
ω ) with
Frequency Ratio For Different Damping
7
6
(ω / ω ni )2
(ω / ω ni )2 D i (ω) =
(ω /ω n)^2.D(ω )
5 zhi=0
;
4 zhi=0.1
zhi=0.2 (1 − ω 2
/ ω ni )
2 2
+ (2ζ i ω / ω ni )
2
3
zhi=1 1
(ω / ω ni )2 D i max =
( )
2 zhi=2
1 2ζ 1 − ζ 2
0
0 1 2 3
Frequency Ratio ω /ω n
840
Second Edition
Note that the behaviour of (ω/ωn)2Di(ω) for small and large ω/ωn is opposite to that of Di(ω). The maximum is the
same but the location is different. The ratio p0/m is the acceleration of the mass if the mass is unrestrained. Hence
(ω/ωn)2Di(ω) approaches unity for large (ω/ωn)2. The term (ω/ωn)2Di(ω) is then the multiplier to p0/k accounting for
the time varying nature of the loading and the stiffness and damping of the system. Clearly, ω/ωn needs to be such
that (ω/ωn)2Di(ω)p0/m is within the acceptable acceleration limit.
5.6.3.3 Base Isolation - Controlling Displacement Response From Harmonic Base Enforced Motion
As described in Section 4.5.4.4, for a SDOF system subjected to base harmonic excitations u0sinωt, in absolute
terms the response would be
u 0 1 + (2ζω / ω n )
2
2ζω / ω n
u (t) = sin (ωt + β − θ ) θ = tan −1 β = tan −1 ( 2ζω / ω n )
(1 − ω 2
ω 2n ) 2 + ( 2ζω / ω n ) 2 (1 − ω 2
ω 2n )
Defining an expression for the displacement transmissibility as the absolute displacement response amplitude
divided by the amplitude of the enforcing harmonic displacement u0,
1 + (2ζω / ω n )
2
Tr =
(1 − ω 2 ω 2n ) 2 + ( 2ζω / ω n ) 2
This is the (absolute) displacement transmissibility expression.
When we design for the displacement response, it is usually the relative response that we are concerned with. Now
the steady state solution for the relative (to base) displacement is
u 0 ω 2 / ω 2n 2ζω / ω n
u r (t ) = sin (ωt − θ ) θ = tan −1
(1 − ω 2
ω 2n ) + ( 2ζω / ω n )
2 2 (1 − ω 2 ω 2n )
This expression is numerically equivalent to (ω/ωn)2Di(ω) and is shown below.
ω /ω
Variation of (ω ω n)^2.D(ω
ω ) with
Frequency Ratio For Different Damping
7
6
(ω /ω n)^2.D(ω )
5 zhi=0
4 zhi=0.1
zhi=0.2
3
zhi=1
2 zhi=2
1
0
0 1 2 3
Frequency Ratio ω /ω n
Clearly for design, ω/ωn needs to be such that (ω/ωn)2Di(ω)u0 is within the acceptable relative displacement limit.
Note that for large ω/ωn values the expression approaches unity and hence the relative displacement response
approaches the displacement of the base motion and needs to be designed for.
841
Second Edition
5.6.3.4 Base Isolation - Controlling Acceleration Response From Harmonic Base Enforced Motion
The acceleration transmissibility (absolute acceleration response amplitude divided by the amplitude of the
enforcing harmonic acceleration) is exactly similar to the (absolute) displacement transmissibility.
1 + (2ζω / ω n )
2
Tr =
(1 − ω 2 ω 2n ) 2 + ( 2ζω / ω n ) 2
This formula is effective to determine the natural frequency (hence stiffness) and damping of an isolation system
knowing the input displacement or acceleration and the maximum acceptable dynamic acceleration that the
structural component can be subjected to.
Remember that only when damping is small that the maximum transmissibility can be approximated to occur at
resonance. When damping is high, it is imperative that the transmissibility expression be differentiated or plotted
(also use cannot be made of ω = ωn(1-2ζ2)1/2 as this is based on differentiating and maximizing the (magnitude of
the) dynamic amplification factor, D(ω)).
A plot of Tr versus ω/ωn is somewhat similar to that of (magnitude of the) dynamic amplification D versus ω/ωn,
except that all the curves of different ζ pass through the same point of Tr = 1.0 when ω/ωn = √2. Noting the curves
after this point it is observed that damping tends to reduce the effectiveness of vibration isolation for frequency
ratios greater than √2.

6
zhi=0
5
zhi=0.1
4 zhi=0.2
zhi=0.3
3
zhi=0.4
2 zhi=1.0
zhi=2.0
1
0
0 1 2
greater than √2 (where a spring mounting supporting system acts as a effective vibration isolator). This is not so
842
Second Edition
An example of isolation systems in practice occurs in the case of the EUROSTAR train.
Bogie 1 Typical Bogie Bogie 9
M tonne 40.021 27.000 32.102

Ks kN/m 870 580 1250
Cs kNs/m 20 2 20
Mb tonne 3.025 3.250 3.200
Ib tm² 2.800 2.800 2.800
Kp kN/m 2200 2075 1560
Cp kNs/m 12 12 12
a m 3.0 3.0 3.0
Mw tonne 2.128 2.095 2.113
The primary (bogie) suspension system has a natural frequency of about 5.7Hz, hence filtering frequencies higher
than √2 x 5.7 = 8.1Hz. The secondary (deck) suspension system has a natural frequency of about 0.7Hz, hence
filtering frequencies higher than √2 x 0.7 = 1.0Hz.
843
Second Edition
Below is the modulus FFT of the acceleration response showing clearly the dominant frequency components of the
response at the wheels, bogie and train deck.
Another reason to employ isolation is to isolate rail-induced vibrations through the ground onto submerged
structures or adjacent structures. The frequency content ranges from 1Hz to 150-200Hz. Structural vibrations occur
due the 8Hz to 20Hz frequencies. Railway excitations have a pronounced frequency band between 40Hz and 80Hz,
causing significant acoustic phenomena (structure borne sound). Note that noise can be detected above a frequency
of about 16Hz. Vibration isolation devices typically ranging from 8Hz to 12Hz can be used to isolate frequencies
above these.
Road traffic also induces vibration with a frequency range from 1 to 200-400Hz but does not, in contrast with rail-
induced vibrations, exhibit pronounced frequency components.
5.6.3.5 Base Isolation – Controlling Force Transmitted Into Foundation From Harmonic Load Excitations
The force transmissibility (force response amplitude divided by the amplitude of the enforcing harmonic force of
p0sinωt, i.e. p0) is also exactly similar to the (absolute) displacement transmissibility.
1 + (2ζω / ω n )
2
Tr =
(1 − ω 2 ω 2n ) 2 + ( 2ζω / ω n ) 2
The transmissibility expression can be used for the force induced by a rotating machine into the supporting
structure. Design supporting system such that ω/ωn = √2 for no dynamic effects. Note that the transmissibility
expression is only valid for the force transmitted if the foundation is rigid. If the foundation is not rigid, then the
supporting system must be even more flexible in order to provide the same level of protection as when the
foundation is rigid.
844
Second Edition
5.6.4 GL, ML Tuned Mass Damper (TMD) Systems
The TMD is a device consisting of a mass, spring and damper to reduce mechanical vibrations. The frequency and
damping of the TMD is tuned so that when the structure resonates at a particular frequency, the TMD vibrates out-
of-phase transferring the energy from the primary system (i.e. the structure) to the secondary system (i.e. the TMD)
and dissipating it in the damper. Maximum flow of energy from the primary system to the TMD occurs when the
displacement of the TMD lags that of the primary mass by 90°. The acceleration of the TMD is then in phase with
velocity of the primary system.
The TMD concept was introduced by Frahm in 1909 to reduce the rolling motion of ships and ship hull vibrations.
Significant theoretical contributions were made by Den Hartog (1940) for undamped systems subject to harmonic
excitations. Extensions to the theory were then presented by Randall (1981), Warburton (1982) and Tsai & Lin
(1993).
The figure below illustrates the typical configuration of a unidirectional translational tuned mass damper. The mass
rests on bearings that function as rollers and allow the mass to translate laterally relative to the floor. Springs and
dampers are inserted between the mass and the adjacent vertical support members which transmit the lateral “out-
of-phase” force to the floor level, and then into the structural frame. Bidirectional translational dampers are
configured with springs/dampers in 2 orthogonal directions and provide the capability for controlling structural
motion in 2 orthogonal planes.
The early versions of TMD’s employ complex mechanisms for the bearing and damping elements, have relatively
large masses, occupy considerably space, and are quite expensive. Recent versions, such as the scheme shown
below, have been designed to minimize these limitations. This scheme employs a multi-assemblage of elastomeric
rubber bearings, which function as shear springs, and bitumen rubber compound (BRC) elements, which provide
viscoelastic damping capability. The device is compact in size, requires unsophisticated controls, is
multidirectional, and is easily assembled and modified.
845
Second Edition
The problems associated with the bearings can be eliminated by supporting the mass with cables which allow the
system to behave as a pendulum.
The equation of motion for the horizontal direction is
where T is the tension in the cable. When θ is small, the following approximations apply
Hence
and it follows that the equivalent shear spring stiffness is
The natural frequency of the pendulum is
The natural period of the pendulum is
The simple pendulum tuned mass damper concept has a serious limitation. Since the period depends on L, the
required length for large Td may be greater than the typical story height. This problem can be eliminated by
resorting to the scheme illustrated below.
846
Second Edition
The interior rigid link magnifies the support motion for the pendulum, and results in the following equilibrium
equation.
The rigid link moves in phase with the damper, and has the same displacement amplitude. Then, taking u1= ud
The equivalent stiffness is Wd/2L, and it follows that the effective length is equal to 2L. Each additional link
increases the effective length by L.
The concepts of designing the passive tuned mass damper illustrated below are based on geometrically and
materially linear frequency domain dynamic analyses. In deriving the equations of motion, we use absolute terms
of displacement, velocity and acceleration unless we have support motion, in which case it is easier to use relative
terms. Note that in absolute terms, we need the support displacement and velocity in the equation of motion whilst
in relative terms we need only the support acceleration in the equation of motion.
847
Second Edition
5.6.4.1 Damped SDOF System Subject to Harmonic Force and Support Motion Excitations
The analysis of the TMD involves the prediction of the response of a two-DOF system, the first being that of the
primary system and the second being the TMD. Extensive use is made of (complex arithmetic) mathematical
procedures to predict the steady-state response due to harmonic excitations in the frequency domain. The
employment of complex arithmetic simply allows the representation of the response and the excitation functions in
complex numbers. To illustrate this elegant mathematical approach, the steady-state response of a SDOF system is
first illustrated, forming the basis of further analyses involving the TMD and the primary system.
P(t) = p0cosωt
k
m
cd
u(t)
&
u&s ( t ) = a 0 cos ωt
In absolute terms, the equation of motion of a SDOF system subjected to harmonic force excitation and support motion is
m&u&( t ) + c(u&( t ) − u&s ( t ) ) + k (u ( t ) − u s ( t ) ) = P( t )
In relative terms,
u r (t ) = u( t) − u s (t)
Hence,
m(& u&s ( t ) ) + cu&r ( t ) + ku r ( t ) = P( t )
u&r ( t ) + &
m&
u&r ( t ) + cu&r ( t ) + ku r ( t ) = P( t ) − m& u&s ( t )
For harmonic excitations,
[
P( t ) = Re al p 0 e iωt ] and [
u&s ( t ) = Re al a 0 e iωt
& ]
For the inhomogenous part (steady - state solution), assume u r ( t ) = Re al F(ω)e iωt , [ ]
− mω F(ω) + icωF(ω) + kF(ω) = p 0 + ma 0
2
p 0 + ma 0
F(ω) =
k − mω 2 + icω
p 0 + ma 0 cω 2ζω / ω n
F(ω) = , θ = tan −1 = tan −1
(k − mω ) 2 2
+ (cω) e iθ
2 k − mω 2
(
1 − ω2 / ωn 2 )
(p 0 + ma 0 ) / k 2ζω / ω n
F(ω) = e −iθ , θ = tan −1
(1 − ω 2
/ ωn )
2 2
+ (2ζω / ω n )2 (1 − ω 2
/ ωn
2
)
Thus, the steady - state solution is
[
u r ( t ) = Re al F(ω)e iωt ]
(p 0 + ma 0 ) / k 2ζω / ω n
u r (t ) = cos(ωt − θ), θ = tan −1
(1 − ω 2
/ ωn )
2 2
+ (2ζω / ω n )2
(1 − ω 2 ω 2n )
848
Second Edition
5.6.4.2 Undamped Structure, Undamped TMD System Subject to Harmonic Force Excitation
P(t) = p0cosωt
k kd
m md
ud(t)
u(t)
Note that ωn2 = k / m

ωd2 = kd / md
In absolute terms, the equations of motion of the two − DOF system subjected to harmonic force excitation are
m&u&( t ) + ku ( t ) − k d (u d ( t ) − u ( t ) ) = P( t )
md& u&d ( t ) + k d (u d ( t ) − u ( t ) ) = 0
[
P( t ) = Re al p 0 e iωt ]
[ ]
For the inhomogenous part (steady - state solution), assume u ( t ) = Re al F(ω)e iωt and u d ( t ) = Re al Fd (ω)e iωt , [ ]
− mω F(ω) + kF(ω) − k d Fd (ω) + k d F(ω) = p 0
2
− m d ω 2 Fd (ω) + k d Fd (ω) − k d F(ω) = 0

These are two equations which can be solved simultaneously for the complex frequency response functions (FRFs)
F(ω) and Fd (ω) and converted into polar form to yield,
F(ω) =
p0 (
f 2 − ρ2
e iθ1
)
[( )(
k 1 − ρ 2 f 2 − ρ 2 − µρ 2 f 2 ) ]
p0 ρ 2
Fd (ω) = e iθ 2
[( )(
k 1 − ρ f − ρ 2 − µρ 2 f 2
2 2
) ]
Note that
ωd kd / md
f = natural frequency ratio = =
k/m ωn
ω ω
ρ = forced frequency ratio = =
ωn k/m
m
µ = mass ratio = d
m
For completion, the steady - state solutions are
[
u ( t ) = Re al F(ω)e iωt ]
[
u d ( t ) = Re al Fd (ω)e iωt
]
The plot of the magnitude of the FRF F(ω) (of the primary system) divided by the static displacement p/k, i.e. the
(magnitude of the) dynamic amplification factor D(ω) is presented.
849
Second Edition
Dynamic Magnification Factor of Primary System D(w)

20
18
16
14
12
D(w)
10
8
6
4
2
0
0.6 0.8 1 1.2
Forcing Frequency Ratio, ρ
Primary Mass Primary Mass - TMD (f = 1.0)

Primary Mass - TMD (f = 1.1)
The optimum conditions are ascertained by changing the mass ratio µ and the natural frequency ratio f.
Changing the frequency ratio, f has the effect of changing the position where D(ω) becomes zero, i.e. D(ω)
becomes zero at when ρ = f. Changing the mass ratio has the effect of changing the distance between the peaks of
D(ω) with higher values resulting in a greater spread.

20
18
16
14
12
D(w)
10
8
6
4
2
0
0.6 0.8 1 1.2
Primary Mass
Primary Mass - TMD (mass ratio = 0.1)
Primary Mass - TMD (mass ratio = 0.2)
850
Second Edition
5.6.4.3 Undamped Structure, Damped TMD System Subject to Harmonic Force Excitation
P(t) = p0cosωt
k kd
m md
cd
ud(t)
u(t)
Note that ωn2 = k / m

ωd2 = kd / md
c = 2ζωnm (here undefined)
cd = 2ζdωdmd
In absolute terms, the equations of motion of the two − DOF system subjected to harmonic force excitation are
m&u&( t ) + ku ( t ) − c d (u&d ( t ) − u&( t ) ) − k d (u d ( t ) − u ( t ) ) = P( t )
md& u&d ( t ) + c d (u&d ( t ) − u&( t ) ) + k d (u d ( t ) − u ( t ) ) = 0
[
P( t ) = Re al p 0 e iωt ]
[
For the inhomogenous part (steady - state solution), assume u ( t ) = Re al F(ω)e iωt and u d ( t ) = Re al Fd (ω)e iωt , ] [ ]
− mω F(ω) + kF(ω) − ic d ωFd (ω) + ic d ωF(ω) − k d Fd (ω) + k d F(ω) = p 0
2
− m d ω 2 Fd (ω) + ic d ωFd (ω) − ic d ωF(ω) + k d Fd (ω) − k d F(ω) = 0

F(ω) =
p0 (f − ρ ) + (2ζ ρf )
2 2 2
d
2
e iθ1
k
[(1 − ρ 2
)(f − ρ ) − µρ f ] + [2ζ ρf [1 − ρ
2 2 2 2 2
d
2
(1 + µ )]]
2
p0 ρ 2
Fd (ω) = e iθ 2
k
[(1 − ρ )(f2 2
−ρ 2
) − µρ f ] + [2ζ ρf [1 − ρ
2 2 2
d
2
(1 + µ)]]
2
Note that
ωd kd / md
ωn k/m
ω ω
ωn k/m
md
µ = mass ratio =
m
[
u ( t ) = Re al F(ω)e iωt ]
[
u d ( t ) = Re al Fd (ω)e iωt
]
851
Second Edition
The plot of the magnitude of the FRF F(ω) (of the primary system) divided by the static displacement p/k, i.e. the
(magnitude of the) dynamic amplification factor D(ω) is presented.

20
18
16 Common Points
14
12
D(w)
10
8
6
4
2
0
0.6 0.8 1 1.2
Damping 0.0 of Critical Damping 0.1 of Critical

Damping 0.32 of Critical
The optimum conditions are ascertained by changing the mass ratio µ, the natural frequency ratio f and the level
of damping ζd. It is noticed that for whatever combination, there will always be two common points (which are
independent of ζd) on the plot of D(ω).
The greater the mass ratio µ, the lower will be the response. Also, a larger mass ratio would render the TMD less
sensitive to tuning, a characteristic which is much valuable in practice as the estimate of the modal frequencies
change with insertion of cladding, non-structural components etc. The mass ratio is usually between 0.01 and 0.1.
By changing the ratio of the natural frequency ratio f, we will change the relative height of the two common points.
The optimum condition will be when the two common points are at the same height. It can be shown from algebra
that this condition is achieved when f is tuned such that
1
f opt =
1+ µ
which gives the amplitude at the common points as
2
D(ω) = 1 +
µ
By changing the damping ζd we will change the point at which the curves attain their maxima, i.e. whether at the
above common points or not. We know that the amplitude at resonance is limited only by the damping force. If ζd =
0, there is no energy dissipation and hence two (since this is a two-DOF system) resonant peaks of infinite
amplitude is attained on D(ω). When ζd is infinite, the two masses are practically locked to each other, their relative
displacement is thus zero, hence causing no work to be done by the damper, and thus a single resonant peak of
infinite amplitude is attained on D(ω). There is thus an optimum value of ζd for which there will be maximum work
done by the damper, and this would be the point at which the response of the primary system is minimum. The
852
Second Edition
optimum condition for the choice of ζd is achieved when the two curves pass the common points at the maxima.
But this does not occur at the same time. Expressions for when the first curve passes the first common point at its
maximum and the second curve passes the second common point at its maximum can be averaged to yield a useful
optimum damping of
3µ
ζ d ,opt =
8(1 + µ )
Thus, in order to design a TMD to reduce vibrations from harmonic force excitations, the following approach is
undertaken. Clearly, one should select the TMD location to coincide with the maximum amplitude of the mode
shape that is being controlled.
(i) Choose the practically greatest possible mass ratio, µ whilst still satisfying the maximum displacement
criteria for both F(ω) and Fd(ω)
(ii) Determine the optimum natural frequency ratio, f and hence calculate the stiffness of the TMD, kd
1
f opt =
1+ µ
ω d = f opt ω n
k d = m d ω d2
(iii) Determine the optimum damping ratio, ζd,opt and hence calculate the optimum damping of the TMD, cd
3µ
ζ d ,opt =
8(1 + µ )
c d ,opt = 2ζ d ,opt ω d m d
As an example, we shall investigate the design of a TMD for the London Heathrow Terminal 5 Visual Control
Tower. The 85.5m high tower has a total mass of 680.9 tonnes and a fundamental global tower mode (0.91Hz)
modal mass of 396 tonnes with the eigenvector normalized at the location of the TMD, i.e. at 78.3m. Note that
there are other local (cable) modes of lower frequencies.
853
Second Edition
The natural frequencies of the modes of the tower are presented for completion. The corresponding modal masses
are also presented with the eigenvectors MAX normalized.
T5 VCR REAL MODAL ANALYSIS - FREQUENCY
4.000
Cable Modes
3.500
Secondary Tower
3.000
Bending Modes
Frequency (Hz)
2.500
Primary Tower
2.000 Cable Modes Cable Modes Torsion Mode
1.500
Cable Modes
1.000 Primary Tower
Bending Modes
0.500
0.000
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50
Mode Number
250.000
Bending Modes
200.000
Modal Mass (Tonnes)
175.000
150.000
100.000
75.000
50.000 Cable Modes

25.000
0.000
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50
Mode Number
854
Second Edition
The characteristic of the modes are also expounded.

Natural Frequency (Hz)
The calculation for optimum properties of a 25 tonne TMD is presented.
md 25000
Mass Ratio, µ = = = 0.0631
m 396000
1
Optimum Frequency Ratio, f opt = = 0.9406
1+ µ
Frequency of Secondary System, f d = f opt f 1
= 0.9406 * 0.951
= 0.895 Hz
Optimum Stiffness of TMD, k d = m d (2πf d )
2
= 25000 * (2π * 0.895 )2

= 789745.14 N/m
3µ
Optimum Damping Ratio, ζ opt =
8(1 + µ)
= 0.14922
Viscous Damping Coefficient, c d = 2m d ω d ζ opt
= 2 * 25000 * (2πf d )ζ opt
= 41936.103 Ns/m
855
Second Edition
The figure below shows the displacement magnification factor D(ω) at the AMD level with harmonic excitation at
the AMD level. This shows that the effective damping of the primary tower mode from the TMD is 9.7% of critical
since the reduction of maximum amplification reduces from 33.2 to 4.84.
856
Second Edition
5.6.4.4 Undamped Structure, Damped TMD System Subject to Harmonic Support Motion
k kd
m md
cd
ud(t)
u(t)
üs(t) = a0cosωt
In absolute terms, the equations of motion of the two − DOF system subjected to harmonic support motion are
m&u&( t ) + k (u ( t ) − u s ( t ) ) − c d (u&d ( t ) − u&( t ) ) − k d (u d ( t ) − u ( t ) ) = 0
u&d ( t ) + c d (u&d ( t ) − u&( t ) ) + k d (u d ( t ) − u ( t ) ) = 0
md&
In relative terms,
u r (t ) = u( t) − u s (t )
u dr ( t ) = u d ( t ) − u ( t ) = u d ( t ) − u r ( t ) − u s ( t )
Hence,
m&
u&r ( t ) + ku r ( t ) − c d u&dr ( t ) − k d u dr ( t ) = −m& u&s ( t )
md&u&dr ( t ) + c d u&dr ( t ) + k d u dr ( t ) = −m d & u&s ( t ) − m d & u&r ( t )
[
& ]
[
For the inhomogenous part (steady - state solution), assume u r ( t ) = Re al F(ω)e iωt and u dr ( t ) = Re al Fd (ω)e iωt , ] [ ]
−mω F(ω) + kF(ω) − ic d ωFd (ω) − k d Fd (ω) = −ma 0
2
−m d ω 2 Fd (ω) + ic d ωFd (ω) + k d Fd (ω) = −m d a 0 + m d ω 2 F(ω)

F(ω) = −
a 0m [(1 + µ)f − ρ ] + (2ζ ρf (1 + µ))
2 2 2
d
2
e iθ3
k
[(1 − ρ 2
)(f − ρ ) − µρ f ] + [2ζ ρf [1 − ρ
2 2 2 2 2
d
2
(1 + µ )]]
2
a 0m 1
Fd (ω) = − e iθ 4
k
[(1 − ρ )(f2 2
−ρ 2
) − µρ f ] + [2ζ ρf [1 − ρ
2 2 2
d
2
(1 + µ )]]
2
Note that
ωd kd / md
ωn k/m
ω ω
ωn k/m
md
µ = mass ratio =
m
[
u dr ( t ) = Re al [F (ω)e ]
d
iωt
857
Second Edition
The amplification factors for harmonic ground motion are essentially similar to the amplification factors for
external harmonic loading so long as the mass ratio is small. The exact expressions for the optimum conditions for
harmonic ground motion are nevertheless presented here.
As before, the optimum conditions are ascertained by changing the mass ratio µ, the forcing frequency ratio f and
the level of damping ζd. It is noticed that for whatever combination, there will always be two common points
(which are independent of ζd) on the plot of D(ω).
The greater the mass ratio, the lower will be the response. The mass ratio is usually between 0.01 and 0.1.
By changing the ratio of the forcing frequency f, we will change the relative height of the two common points. The
optimum condition will be when the two common points are at the same height. The optimum frequency ratio f is
1− µ/ 2
f opt =
1+ µ
The optimum condition for the choice of ζd is achieved when the two curves pass the common points at the
maxima. But this does not occur at the same time. An average damping ratio that yields the optimum damping is
3µ
ζ d ,opt =
8(1 + µ )(1 − µ / 2 )
Thus, in order to design a TMD to reduce vibrations from harmonic force excitations, the following approach is
undertaken. Clearly, one should select the TMD location to coincide with the maximum amplitude of the mode
shape that is being controlled.
(i) Choose the practically greatest possible mass ratio, µ whilst still satisfying the maximum displacement
criteria for both F(ω) and Fd(ω)
(ii) Determine the optimum natural frequency ratio, f and hence calculate the stiffness of the TMD, kd
1− µ / 2
f opt =
1+ µ
ω d = f opt ω n
k d = m d ω d2
(iii) Determine the optimum damping ratio, ζd,opt and hence calculate the optimum damping of the TMD, cd
3µ
ζ d ,opt =
8(1 + µ )(1 − µ / 2 )
c d ,opt = 2ζ d ,opt ω d m d
858
Second Edition
5.6.4.5 Damped Structure, Damped TMD System Subject to Harmonic Force and Support Motion
P(t) = p0cosωt
k kd
m md
c cd
ud(t)
u(t)
üs(t) = a0cosωt
In absolute terms, the equations of motion of the two − DOF system subjected to harmonic force and support motion are
m&u&( t ) + c(u&( t ) − u&s ( t ) ) + k (u ( t ) − u s ( t ) ) − c d (u&d ( t ) − u&( t ) ) − k d (u d ( t ) − u ( t ) ) = P( t )
md& u&d ( t ) + c d (u&d ( t ) − u&( t ) ) + k d (u d ( t ) − u ( t ) ) = 0
In relative terms,
u r (t ) = u (t) − u s (t )
u dr ( t ) = u d ( t ) − u ( t ) = u d ( t ) − u r ( t ) − u s ( t )
Hence,
m&
u&r ( t ) + cu&r ( t ) + ku r ( t ) − c d u&dr ( t ) − k d u dr ( t ) = P( t ) − m&
u&s ( t )
md&u&dr ( t ) + c d u&dr ( t ) + k d u dr ( t ) = −m d &u&s ( t ) − m d &u&r ( t )
P( t ) = Re al p 0 e iωt[ ] and [
& ]
For the inhomogenous part (steady - state solution), assume u r ( t ) = Re al F(ω)e iωt and u dr ( t ) = Re al Fd (ω)e iωt , [ ] [ ]
−mω F(ω) + icωF(ω) + kF(ω) − ic d ωFd (ω) − k d Fd (ω) = p 0 − ma 0
2
−m d ω 2 Fd (ω) + ic d ωFd (ω) + k d Fd (ω) = −m d a 0 + m d ω 2 F(ω)

F(ω) =
p0 (
f 2 − ρ 2 + (2ζ d ρf )2 )2
e iθ1
[ ( )( d ) d ] (
k − f 2 ρ 2 µ + 1 − ρ 2 f 2 − ρ 2 − 4ζζ fρ 2 2 + 4 ζρ f 2 − ρ 2 + ζ fρ 1 − ρ 2 (1 + µ ) 2 

) [ ]
− 0
a m [
(1 + µ )f 2 − ρ 2 + (2ζ d ρf (1 + µ ))2 ] 2
e iθ 2
[ ( )( ) ]
k − f 2 ρ 2 µ + 1 − ρ 2 f 2 − ρ 2 − 4ζζ fρ 2 2 + 4 ζρ f 2 − ρ 2 + ζ fρ 1 − ρ 2 (1 + µ ) 2 
d  d 
( ) [ ]
p ρ 2
Fd (ω) = 0 e iθ3
[
k − f ρ µ + 1 − ρ f − ρ − 4ζζ fρ
2 2 2 2 2
( d )(
2 2

)
2 2 2
]
+ 4 ζρ f − ρ + ζ d fρ 1 − ρ (1 + µ ) 
2

( ) [ ]
a m 1
− 0 e iθ 4
[
k − f ρ µ + 1 − ρ f − ρ − 4ζζ fρ
2 2 2 2 2
( d )(
2 2

2 2
) 2
]
+ 4 ζρ f − ρ + ζ d fρ 1 − ρ (1 + µ ) 
2

( ) [ ]
[
u dr ( t ) = Re al [F (ω)e ]
d
iωt
859
Second Edition
As before, the optimum conditions are ascertained by changing the mass ratio µ, the forcing frequency ratio f and
the level of damping ζd. The greater the mass ratio, the lower will be the response. The mass ratio is usually
between 0.01 and 0.1. Analytical solutions for the optimum natural frequency ratio, f and the optimum damping
ratio, ζd,opt cannot be found. The two common points (which are independent of ζd) on the D(ω) plot no longer
exist.
For force excitation, the optimum values of f and ζd for small values of ζ can be formulated empirically (Ioi and
Ikeda, 1978) as follows.
1
f opt = − (0.241 + 1.7µ − 2.6µ 2 )ζ − (1.0 − 1.9µ + µ 2 )ζ 2
1+ µ
3µ
ζd = + (0.13 + 0.12µ + 0.4µ 2 )ζ − (0.01 + 0.9µ + 3µ 2 )ζ 2
8(1 + µ )
Tolerance or permissible error ranges attached to the above equations are found to be less than 1% for 0.03 < µ <
0.40 and 0.0 < ζ < 0.15, which are the ranges of practical interest.
860
Second Edition
5.6.4.6 TMD Analysis Summary (Warburton, 1982)
Clearly, one should select the TMD location to coincide with the maximum amplitude of the mode shape that is
being controlled. The mass of the primary system will be the (POINT normalized to the TMD DOF) modal mass of
the mode in which damping is intended. The greater the mass ratio µ, the lower will be the response and the smaller
the sensitivity to tuning. Hence, choose the practically greatest possible mass ratio, µ whilst still satisfying the
maximum displacement criteria for both F(ω) and Fd(ω). Then determine the optimum natural frequency ratio, f
and hence calculate the stiffness of the TMD, kd = mdωd2. Finally, determine the optimum damping ratio, ζd,opt and
hence calculate the optimum damping of the TMD, cd = 2ζd,optωdmd. The structure and the TMD can be modeled
and analyzed within a MSC.NASTRAN frequency domain analysis (SOL 108 or SOL 112) to confirm the results.
Optimized
Excitation Optimum Natural Maximum
Excitation Optimized Optimum TMD
System Applied Frequency Ratio, fopt = (Relative)
Type Parameter Damping, ζd,opt
To ωd/ωn Response of
Structure, ur
Damped Deterministic
Primary
Primary Mass (p 0 + ma 0 ) / k
System Harmonic
Mass and
Support
Displacement
N/A N/A
(
2ζ 1 − ζ 2 )
Undamped
System, Deterministic Primary Primary Mass
N/A N/A 0.0
Undamped Harmonic Mass Displacement
TMD
Undamped
System, Deterministic Primary Primary Mass 1 3µ p0 2
1+
Damped Harmonic Mass Displacement 1+ µ 8(1 + µ ) k µ
TMD
Undamped
System, Deterministic Primary Primary Mass 1 3µ p0 2
Damped Harmonic Mass Acceleration 1+ µ 8(1 + µ / 2 ) k µ(1 + µ)
TMD
Undamped
System, Deterministic Primary Mass 1− µ / 2 3µ ma 0 2
Support (1 + µ)
Damped Harmonic Displacement 1+ µ 8(1 + µ )(1 − µ / 2 ) k µ
TMD
Undamped
System, Deterministic Primary Mass 1 3µ ma 0 2
Support 1+
Damped Harmonic Acceleration 1+ µ 8(1 + µ ) k µ
TMD
Undamped
System, Primary 1+ µ / 2 µ(1 + 3µ / 4) p0 1 + 3µ / 4
Random
Damped Mass 1+ µ 4(1 + µ )(1 + µ / 2 ) k µ(1 + µ)
TMD
ma 0
Undamped (1 + µ) 1.5 .
System, 1− µ / 2 µ(1 − µ / 4) k
Random Support
Damped 1+ µ 4(1 + µ )(1 − µ / 2 ) 1 1
TMD −
µ 4
Damped 1 3µ
System, Deterministic Primary Primary Mass 1+ µ 8(1 + µ )
Damped Harmonic Mass Displacement − (0.241 + 1.7µ − 2.6µ 2 )ζ + (0.13 + 0.12µ + 0.4µ 2 )ζ
TMD − (1.0 − 1.9µ + µ 2 )ζ 2 − (0.01 + 0.9µ + 3µ 2 )ζ 2
Damped 1 3µ(1 + 0.49µ − 0.2µ 2 )

System, Deterministic Primary Primary Mass 1+ µ 8(1 + µ )
Damped Harmonic Mass Displacement + (0.096 + 0.88µ − 1.8µ 2 )ζ + (0.13 + 0.72µ + 0.2µ 2 )ζ
TMD + (1.34 − 2.9µ + 3µ 2 )ζ 2 + (0.19 + 1.6µ − 4µ 2 )ζ 2
861
Second Edition
The displacement optimization parameter is used essentially to determine the safety and integrity of the structure
under external excitations. Since large accelerations of a structure under excitations produce detrimental effects on
functionality of nonstructural components, base shear and occupant comfort, minimizing structural accelerations
can also be a viable optimization criterion.
The effective damping often quoted for a system with a TMD is obtained simply by the following equation
ζeff = 1/(2Dopt(ω))
as this is consistent with the definition of the maximum dynamic amplification for SDOF systems without TMD
which for small values of ζ is
Dmax(ω) = 1/(2ζ)
For broadband seismic applications, Villaverde (1985) had suggested the following equations for optimum
parameters with mass ratio based on modal mass with eigenvector POINT normalized to location of TMD.
f opt = 1
ζ d ,opt = ζ + µ
For broadband seismic applications, Fadek et. al. (1997) suggested the following equations for optimum parameters
with mass ratio based on modal mass with eigenvector POINT normalized to location of TMD.
1  µ 
f opt = 1 − ζ 
1 + µ  1 + µ 
ζ µ
ζ d ,opt = +
1+ µ 1+ µ
TMD are effective in seismic applications for structures with low damping, ζ = 0.02. For structures with damping,
ζ = 0.05, TMDs are not very effective since a very large mass ratio is required. TMDs are also not effective in
seismic applications of very stiff structures with periods 0.1-0.2s.
862
Second Edition
5.6.5 GL, ML Tuned Slosh Damper (TSD) Systems 16
TSDs can, in some cases, present a cost-effective alternative to Tuned Mass Dampers for reducing the response of
lively structures. Their principle strengths are low initial cost and virtually maintenance-free operation.
5.6.5.1 When To Employ TSDs
For a TSD to be the right solution, the following should be true: -
I. The problem motion of the structure is predominantly horizontal at the proposed location of the
damper.
II. The volume available for the damper is at least twice that of the TSD liquid which would provide the
required damper mass. This allows space for sloshing and the redundant mass of liquid.
III. The problem mode has a natural frequency below 2 Hz. Above this frequency, dampers become so
small that a prohibitively large number of damper tanks would be necessary to generate appreciable
damper mass.
Number of damper tanks required for a 1 tonne damper
2000
Number of Damper Tanks
1500
1000
500
0
0 0.5 1 1.5 2
Design Frequency /Hz
The following is desirable: -

I. The natural frequency of the problem mode is accurately known (i.e. from testing). TSDs can be designed
to work across a range of natural frequency however, this can lead to increasing the complexity of the
design, having a variable damper mass or reducing the effectiveness of the damper for low amplitude
motions. The concession is dependent on the design route taken.
5.6.5.2 Operations of TSDs
Broadly speaking, two types of TSD have been fitted to structures: -
I. ‘Shallow tanks’ where the water height to length ratio is less than 0.1 and the damping is governed chiefly
by wave breaking and viscous action.
16
POWELL, Daniel. Tuned Slosh Dampers. Ove Arup & Partners Ltd., London, 2003.
863
Second Edition
II. ‘Deep tanks’ where the damping is generated by resistance elements in the centre of the tank applying drag
forces to the sloshing liquid
These two types of damper can be implemented in either rectangular or cylindrical tanks. If a structure is
susceptible to lateral excitation in two perpendicular directions, it is possible to use a rectangular damper with
matching sloshing frequencies in the relevant directions. More often than not, the liquid used in TSDs is water, the
main reason for this being cost.
5.6.5.2.1 Sloshing Frequency
Damping
elements
(Deep Tank only)
undisturbed liquid level
Excitation
The sloshing frequency of the nth mode of the tank geometry shown above is given by
1 ng  nπh 
fn = tanh 
2 πa  a 
Note that
I. The only modes of practical interest are the first two asymmetric modes i.e. n=1 the fundamental
sloshing frequency which is tuned to the structure and, to a lesser extent, n=3 (the mass of liquid
associated with this mode is much lower).
1 g
II. A tank of length ‘a’ has a maximum fundamental natural frequency given by i.e. this
2 πa
frequency can’t be exceeded by raising h. In practice, for a given damper arrangement, the TSD
damping decreases with increasing h/a and it is unlikely you would choose to have this ratio
greater than 0.4. Note that h/a ratios of 0.1 to 0.35 are typical for a deep tank damper.
III. The sloshing frequency’s sensitivity to changes in ‘h’ is greatest when h is small hence, if a fixed-
length shallow tank damper is designed for a structure whose natural frequency is slightly different
from that predicted, the effective mass of the re-tuned damper can be very different from the design
value.
IV. This formula is developed using linear theory and the frequencies it predicts are for the related
sloshing modes i.e. for the fundamental mode the liquid surface is approximately a cosine between
0 and π. For shallow tanks, and deep tanks under large amplitude excitation, other sloshing modes
will become apparent.
864
Second Edition
5.6.5.2.2 Effective Mass and “Housner” Respresentation
Not all the liquid in a TSD takes part in the fundamental sloshing mode. There is a fraction, typically 20-30% in
deep tanks and <10% in shallow tanks, which can be considered as static mass added to the structure. The rest of
the liquid is actively sloshing and the mass of this liquid (the ‘effective mass’) can be thought of as that equivalent
to the mass in a TMD. An equivalent mechanical representation of liquid sloshing in tanks was developed by
Housner in the 1950s and is illustrated below.
Housner representation of horizontally excited liquid in tank
M1
h M0
h1
h0
M.g
M1 a  πh 
where effective mass = 0.527 tanh 
M 2h  a 
(b is the damper tank’s internal breadth)
static mass M 0 = M − M1
 πh 
cosh  − 2
height of effective mass
h1
= 1−  a 
h πh  πh 
sinh  
a  a 
 
 
h0 1  4 
height of static mass =  − 1
h 8  
 tanh  3a  3a 
  2h  2h 
 
By evaluating the fundamental sloshing frequency from
1 ng  nπh 
fn = tanh 
2 πa  a 
1 k
the equivalent spring coefficient can be calculated for the Housner model using f = . The heights of the
2π M1
effective and redundant mass give the dynamic moments about the base of the damper due to the ‘spring’ force and
865
Second Edition
inertia force, respectively. The values of these heights could be considered counter-intuitive, it is not unusual for
both values to be greater than h, particularly for shallower tanks. For deeper tanks h0 and h1 can be almost equal.
5.6.5.2.3 Sloshing Height
As part of the TSD design process it is necessary to estimate the sloshing height of the damper. Warnitchai and
Pinkaew’s (Engineering Structures Vol. 20 No. 7) method requires the iterative solving of an equation, Housner’s
method is more straight-forward but its form causes stability problems in an iterative spreadsheet, as is required for
evaluating the non-linear damping of a TSD. Another, simpler, method for estimating the sloshing height for deep
tank TSD is presented. The two basic assumptions are: -
I. The liquid surface is a half cosine wave.
II. The displacement of the centre of mass of the sloshing liquid is equal to the displacement of the
mass in an equivalent TMD.
Clearly this second assumption is a little simplistic as different regions of the TSD liquid move at different rates,
however, following these assumptions leads to the following expression: -
hπ 2
Λ≈ d tmd
2a
where: - Λ is sloshing height above undisturbed liquid level
is displacement of an equivalent TMD
d tmd
Better agreement between this formula and Housner’s method is achieved if a ‘fudge-factor’ of 0.75 is applied to
the above expression.
hπ 2
Λ ≈ 0.75 d tmd
2a
To calculate the equivalent TMD performance, the damping of the TSD needs to be calculated (which in turn being
response dependent requires the sloshing height, hence the requirement for an iterative spreadsheet).
5.6.5.2.4 Stoke’s Number and Nonlinear Sloshing
Under modest levels of excitation, a TSD will slosh in the linear manner discussed previously with fundamental
natural frequency and effective mass close to values obtained from the formulae listed. At higher levels of
excitation sloshing non-linearities are present and new modes appear. There is also a new source of damping
through wave breaking. The transition from the linear state occurs at much lower levels of excitation in a shallow
tank damper. The parameter which governs the degree of non-linearity of sloshing of a TSD is the Stokes' Number,
Us.
4 Λa 2
Us =
h3
At low values of Us (say <20), the TSD sloshing is close to linear. The principle deviation from linear behaviour, in
this Us range, being that the low-level and high-level sloshing heights are not of equal magnitude, the high-level is
around 30% greater at a Us of 10. Despite this, the formulae listed previously based on a linear model still hold. If
damping elements are not present to apply drag-forces on the fluid, damping is very low in this regime of Us
(typically <0.5%). As Us increases, the asymmetry about the undisturbed water height becomes more pronounced
and additional sloshing modes become apparent. Also, wave breaking becomes a significant source of damping. In
this non-linear sloshing regime, the importance of accurate tuning of the damper reduces and the eventually device
becomes more passive-energy-dissipater than tuned-vibration absorber.
5.6.5.2.5 Damping in TSDs
Damping is chiefly introduced by two different mechanisms in TSDs: -

I. Damping elements applying drag forces – obstructions fixed in the tank impede the sloshing of the liquid.
866
Second Edition
II. Wave breaking – at high Stokes' Numbers (i.e. in deep tank dampers under high amplitudes of excitation
and shallow tank dampers generally) significant wave breaking occurs which dissipates energy.
Damping Elements
Damping elements are obstructions immersed in the TSD liquid which the liquid flows past while sloshing. Drag
forces are applied by the damping elements on the liquid, this introduces damping into the system. Damping
elements are normally located in the centre of the tank where the peak velocity of the liquid is a maximum.
Typically damping elements obstruct around 25% of the flow area though this is dependent on the level of damping
required. Frequently used designs of damping element include baffles normal to the flow, perforated plates and
wire-mesh screens.
The drag forces objects immersed in fluids, can be thought of as being comprised of two parts: -
Skin-friction Dτ – the forces applied by shearing as the liquid passes the solid boundaries.
Pressure-drag DP – the net forces applied to the body due to differences in the upstream and downstream
pressure fields.
Broadly speaking, both components of the total drag force increase with fluid velocity V.
Dτ ∝ Vn where n is in the range 1.2 → 1.8
DP ∝ V2
The relative magnitude of these two drag components depends on the geometry of the object in the fluid. For
‘stream-lined’ bodies e.g. a flat plate parallel to the flow direction, the drag will be almost entirely skin friction
while for ‘bluff’ bodies e.g. a flat plate normal to the flow direction, the pressure drag will dominate. For some
cross-sections e.g. a cylinder, the ratio of these two drag forces varies considerably depending on the flow regime
and these simple relationships between drag and fluid velocity are of limited use.
The reason the composition of the drag forces on the damping elements is significant, is that this governs the
degree of non-linearity of the TSD damping. If the drag on the damping elements is mainly viscous and the value
of n in the expression above is close to 1 then the damping in the TSD is close to linear i.e. the damping ratio is
approximately constant. On the other hand, if the damping elements are such that the force on them is dominated
by the pressure-drag component e.g. baffles normal to the flow, the damping is non-linear and amplitude
dependent.
Realistically, damping elements which provide predominantly viscous drag across a wide range of Re e.g. baffles
parallel to the flow, are unlikely to provide sufficient total drag for the damping required in a TSD. One approach is
to use a very fine mesh of wires with cylindrical cross-section such that Re number remains low (say up to 2)
during sloshing. One practical concern with this design is that the mesh will clog up very easily, this would change
the blockage ratio and consequently the performance of the damper.
Warnitchai and Pinkaew developed an equation suggesting that for damping elements of constant CD, the damping
ratio of a TSD is directly proportional to the sloshing height, Λ. This linear relationship is verified by experiment
however, the quantitative predictions from the equation are poor if realistic values for CD are substituted into the
expression, the damping levels predicted being far too low.
Flat plates normal to flow have a drag coefficient which is approximately constant across a wide range of Re. This
is because of the small proportion of surface area in the flow-wise direction for the liquid to shear against, also the
point at which fluid passing the plate separates from the surface (i.e. the edges of the plate) is independent of Re,
meaning the wake area (area over which pressure-drag acts) at the rear of the plate will remain constant. Hence the
drag is dominated by the pressure-drag and increases with V2. Therefore, if baffles normal to the sloshing direction
are used as damping elements, the TSD damping is approximately proportional to sloshing height. Thus, this type
of damping element produces very low damping levels at very low amplitudes of excitation.
867
Second Edition
Based on the proportionality relationship developed by Warnitchai and Pinkaew, an empirical formula is developed
to estimate the TSD damping in a deep tank damper for damping elements of constant drag coefficient.
ε TSD = ε 0 + K.Λ
where ε0 is the damping if the TSD has no damping elements i.e. damping due to shearing at the edge of the tank
between the tank surfaces and the liquid. The value of this damping offset for deep tank TSDs with length to
breadth ratio of about two is typically 0.3→0.4%. As this damping is due purely to shear, it has a low dependence
on the sloshing height, Λ. The above equation is not valid for all values of Λ, for large sloshing heights and hence
Stokes’ Numbers, the damping will be supplemented by wave breaking and the relationship will no longer be
linear. K is a constant dependent on the drag coefficient, blockage ratio and h/a ratio of the TSD. Its value can be
obtained by calculating the gradient on a plot of damping against sloshing height.
Damping element details of the figure above

Case (a) - No Damping Elements (εTSD= ε0)
Case (b) - two cylinders of diameter 22 mm (blockage, Ø = 0.22)
Case (c) - 50 mm flat plate normal to sloshing (Ø = 0.25)
Case (d) - mesh screen, wire diameter 0.26 mm (Ø = 0.29)
Some tabulated K values are as follows.

-1
Style of Damping Blockage h/a K /m
Ratio
Element (TSD height/length)
868
Second Edition
vertical cylinders 0.22 0.3 0.33

Baffles normal 0.25 0.3 1.80
to flow
“ 0.17 0.4 1.31
“ 0.25 0.4 1.65
“ 0.33 0.4 2.39
For three cases, the trend is for a straight line crossing the y-axis at ε0 (~0.003 in this case) the exception is case (d).
For this case the y-axis is intersected at a significantly higher value and there is a less obvious linear fit to the data.
One might expect cases (b) and (d) to exhibit similar trends, both damping elements consisting essentially of flow
obstructions of circular cross-section. The difference lies in the Re numbers. The Re number of the flow past
damping elements varies between zero, when the liquid is instantaneously stationary at the extremity of sloshing,
and some maximum value, a quarter of a sloshing cycle later, when the liquid surface is nominally flat and the
velocity across the damping elements a maximum. The characteristic dimensions for the calculation of Re number
in cases (b) and (d) are 22 and 0.26 mm, respectively. Consequently, for a sloshing height of 2 cm, the
corresponding theoretical maximum Re numbers are 350 and 4. Inspection of the CD versus Re figure indicates that
the drag coefficients in the two TSDs vary across very different ranges, hence drag forces and consequently
damping characteristics are very different.
In order to calculate Re numbers in a TSD, an estimate of the liquid speed at the centre of the tank is required. A
velocity potential function for the liquid is derived in Warnitchai and Pinkaew based on linear theory and, hence,
only applicable to deep tank dampers. By differentiating this expression with respect to the spatial coordinate in the
sloshing direction (x), an expression for the liquid velocity is obtained, dependent on time and position in the tank.
Substituting in the x value for the mid-point of the tank yields: -
 π ( z + h) 
cosh  
U x = Λ.  a  . sin( 2πf t )
π
  h 1
sinh  
 a 
where the previously defined symbols have the same meanings and: -
Ux is the liquid velocity in the horizontal sloshing direction / m/s
z is the vertical co-ordinate with origin at the undisturbed liquid surface / m
f1 is the fundamental sloshing mode of the TSD / Hz
t is time / s
For a given Λ , h and a, the magnitude of U x will be a maximum when sin( 2πf 1t ) =1. If this is substituted into the
above equation, the result is a profile of U x magnitudes against z which can be integrated up to obtain a mean
value of U x , U x where: -
Λa
Ux =
πh
This is the magnitude of a sinusoid so a more representative value is the RMS of this i.e.: -
Λa
U x RMS =
πh 2
This equation can be used to generate the velocity term when calculating practical values of Re number for the flow
across damping elements. Establishing the Re number for damping elements of circular section helps give a
869
Second Edition
qualitative prediction of their behaviour. If the Re number is very low e.g. < 2, the drag will have a significant
viscous component and the TSD will have useful damping at very low levels of excitation (e.g. 2 cm sloshing
height for a typical deep tank TSD) and the TSD’s damping will have less dependence on sloshing height. If
however the Re number is larger than 100, the drag will be dominated by the pressure-drag and, for all practical Re
numbers, the drag coefficient will be approximately constant (assuming the Re Number isn’t going to exceed 105 !),
consequently, the TSD damping will be approximately proportional to sloshing height. As all TSDs with practical
damping levels exhibit some dependence on response, the damping ratio will fall-off either side of resonance as the
magnification factor reduces.
Wave Breaking
At higher Stokes’ Numbers (i.e. high amplitudes of excitation), surface tension is no longer strong enough to keep
the liquid surface continuous and ‘wave breaking’ occurs. There are significant losses associated with this process
which introduce additional damping into the system. In this sloshing regime, the TSDs behaviour deviates
significantly from the linear models used to represent lower amplitude excitation and it is no longer valid to use
them. In our existing TSD literature, there is no method presented for predicting the damping due to wave breaking
and. Typically dampers of 1 to 1.5% of the modal mass of a lightly damped structure can increase the effective
structural damping to between 4 and 5%. One of the main advantages of TSDs which rely on wave breaking to
provide the damping is that the performance of the damper is relatively insensitive to tuning ratio.
5.6.5.2.6 Conditions at Resonance
As for all resonant systems with damping, TSDs exhibit a frequency shift such that the maximum magnification
factor (and hence maximum sloshing height in a ‘frequency-sweep’ test) occurs at tuning-ratios of less than 1,
where tuning ratio is defined as: -
fe
r=
f1
where fe is excitation frequency /Hz and
f1 is the fundamental sloshing frequency
The tuning ratio where the resonance occurs in conventional TMDs is given by: -
r = 1 − 2ε 2
where ε is the damping ratio.
For the case of deep tank TSDs with damping elements, an additional frequency shift occurs. This can be
qualitatively explains as follows: - the liquid flow past the damping elements is unsteady and continuously
accelerating and decelerating. To drive these changes in velocity (by Newton’s Second Law) a variable pressure
gradient must exist in the liquid. As the damping elements are immersed in the liquid, they experience a force due
to this pressure gradient (as described in ‘Morison’s Equation’) and consequently react a drag force back onto the
liquid. This drag-force is conservative (as it is transferring momentum elastically between TSD liquid and
structure) and introduces no damping yet, as it is applying a force on the liquid, it is responsible for a reduction in
natural frequency. The frequency shift due to this effect is calculated analytically in Warnitchai and Pinkaew.
However, in tests this theoretical treatment was found to over-predict the magnitude of the frequency reduction.
From the tests carried out on the Arup Gatwick project, 2% was found to be a practical reduction in the TSD
fundamental frequency. This factor allows for both the reduction due to damping and blockage. This figure was
seen to be approximately correct for damping ratios of order 5-10% and blockage ratios from 0.15-0.35. The
frequency at which the maximum lateral force exerted by the tank on the structure occurs does not necessarily
correspond with the frequency of maximum sloshing height. Indeed, dependent on the size of the redundant liquid
mass and the mass of the empty tank, the frequency of maximum lateral force can be higher or lower than f 1 .
870
Second Edition
5.6.5.3 Deep or Shallow Tank?
As previously discussed, TSDs can be thought of as being shallow tank (h/a<≈0.1) or deep tank.
5.6.5.3.1 Deep Tank
Performance can be predicted analytically – as have been discussed, analytical methods exist for predicting the
behaviour of deep tank dampers. Given the cost of testing TSDs, this is a considerable asset. High mass – although
the proportion of liquid which contributes to the sloshing (effective mass) increases as a damper is made shallower,
the absolute effective mass decreases. Thus, achieving the same mass ratio between structure and damper with
shallow tanks requires more tanks and, in all likelihood, more complexity, as dampers might need to be stacked.
5.6.5.3.2 Shallow Tank
Relatively insensitive to tuning ratio – as the sloshing of a shallow tank damper is non-linear, the Housner
representation is not a good representation of the behaviour. Shallow tank dampers act more as passive energy
absorbers than TMDs or deep tank TSDs, consequently they reduce the worst-case response to a lesser extent than
a well-tuned TMD but they achieve a useful reduction across a broad range of tuning ratios.
5.6.5.3.3 Practical Considerations
Due to the relatively low mass of a shallow tank damper, many tanks are usually required to achieve the required
damper to structure ratio. Hence this style of TSD lends itself to prefabricated stacks of dampers which can be fixed
to a supporting frame on the structure (see reference 1 for examples of this). Once fabricated the only option
available for tuning the frequency of the dampers is adjusting the water depth. Thus, if the natural frequency of the
structure is not known accurately prior to design (i.e. has not been measured), the effective mass and mass ratio of
the dampers can vary significantly.
For the case of deep tank TSDs, it is more probable that the damper mass will be provided by a small number of
large tanks. It is therefore likely that it will be practical to install an adjustable baffle within each of the tanks
allowing variation of the damper dimension in the sloshing direction. This allows greater control of the effective
mass of the TSDs across a range of frequencies, as when a reduction in TSD design frequency is required, the
reduction in depth can be accompanied/replaced by an increase in length (the converse is also true but it is unlikely
that the damper being too massive would be a problem).
In summary, a shallow tank TSD has desirable characteristics if the in-service frequency of the structure is likely to
vary (say +/- 5%) about some well-defined initial value, while a deep tank TSD might be the preferred option if the
frequency is not likely to vary significantly in service (though this might be allowed for by ‘spread-tuning’). If the
design of the TSD is developing in tandem with the structure, deep tank TSDs are probably the more sensible
option as it’s more likely their design-frequency can be changed without compromising their performance.
871
Second Edition
5.6.5.4 Testing
5.6.5.4.1 Experimental Set-Up
In order to test the performance of a TSD, a device is required to replicate the lateral motions of the structure on
which the TSD will be mounted. A ‘Shaker-Table’ is such a device. Typically they consist of a steel table attached
by pin-joints to a series of electronically controlled hydraulic actuators. The TSD is bolted down to the table via
lateral, and possibly vertical, load cells which measure the force transmitted to the TSD. Vertical cells are required
if it is desirable to know the moment applied to the TSD. The other output of interest from the experiments is the
sloshing height, this can be measured by fixing a depth gauge to the TSD tank immersed at the extremity of the
sloshing liquid. A schematic of a typical experimental set-up is shown.
depth gauge
lateral load cell
‘Shaker-Table’
5.6.5.4.2 Measuring Damping
Invariably the purpose of laboratory tests on TSDs is to establish the damping ratio. There are three ways in which
this can be attempted: -
1. Logarithmic-decrement method
2. Half power-point method
3. Random decrement method
872
Second Edition
5.6.5.5 Miscellaneous Design Information
5.6.5.5.1 Separator-Plates
It will often be the case that several damper tanks are required to achieve the required damper mass. In this case it
might prove economic to manufacture one large tank then segment this longitudinally and transversely with
separator plates.
Longitudinal Separator-Plates
In the longitudinal (slosh-wise) direction the plates are installed to prevent excessively large transverse waves due
to reflections. The rule of thumb used is to limit the breadth of each individual slosh tank to half its length. As
the longitudinal plates will have little or no dynamic head difference across them, the seal surrounding the separator
plate is of little importance. Neither, for the same reason, is there a requirement for them to be particularly stiff.
Transverse Separator-Plates
In contrast, the transverse separator plates have a significant dynamic force across them when the TSD is excited as
shown in figure below. For a given water height, translating the plate back and for changes the sloshing frequency
of a TSD so transverse plates will also be required when TSDs are being designed for structures whose natural
frequency is not accurately known.
If there is excessive flexure of the plates during operation then the normal mode of the TSD will be modified
slightly and, experiments indicate that, the natural frequency will be reduced. The seal surrounding transverse
separator plates has a significant impact on the performance of the damper.
head difference
1 2
Seepage under
separator-plate
At the sloshing extremity shown above, TSD liquid will seep from damper 1 to damper 2 at a maximum rate. Half a
cycle later, water will seep in the opposite direction at a maximum rate. The continuous passage of the liquid back-
and-for under the separator-plate introduces damping into the TSD. The characteristics of the damping introduced
are dependent on the size of the gap surrounding the separator-plate. As the gap is reduced, the ‘magnitude’ of the
damping will reduce yet the viscous element of damping will increase (due to the fall in the Re number).
The effect of the gaps was to introduce a considerable amount of damping at low-excitation levels, in effect
‘linearising’ the damper to some degree. Damping levels at higher excitation levels were found to be closer to
predictions, the reason being that the proportion of the damping due to seepage was small compared to the liquid
passing the Damping Elements at a higher rate.
5.6.5.5.2 Additional Considerations
Add anti-freeze if a TSD is to be used externally. Stagnant pools need to be treated for algae and legionaires’
disease. Seal the tank, evaporation will change the TSDs slosh frequency and affect the performance
873
Second Edition
5.6.5.6 Design Procedure for Deep Tank TSDs
The following is a suggested possible design process for deep tank TSDs: -
1. Establish the level of damping required for desired structural response and convert this to an equivalent
peak DAF ( = ½ε).
2. Select a suitable damper to structure modal mass ratio, µ. e.g. using figure below. NB. The DAFs in the
figure are for optimum damping and are unlikely to be achievable in practice.
structural damping
Max DAF at
opt. damping
Mass ratio (Mdamper /Mstructure )
1
3. Calculate the optimum TSD sloshing frequency using f opt = f structure .
1+ µ
4. Choose TSD dimensions such that f 1 = 1.02 f opt using the sloshing frequency formula (The factor of
1.02 accounts for the likely frequency shift due to damping and blockage in the TSD).
5. Calculate M1 (the active sloshing mass of the TSDs) based on the chosen TSD dimensions (assume a
breadth of half the length).
6. Calculate the number of dampers required to provide the required mass ratio using N =
µM mod al .
M1
Do the dampers fit in the space available?
7. Select a ‘K’ (damping per sloshing height) value from table of values presented before and assume
εo=0.03.
8. Plot the DAF for the system in a spreadsheet.
9. If the DAF is below the desired level across the required frequency range, start a sensitivity study (try
varying f1 , M1 and K). If not, inspect a plot of the damping against frequency, try changing K (within
reason) so that the damping is closer to optimum in the region of interest. If this doesn’t work, try a
higher mass ratio.
874
Second Edition
5.7 GL, ML Active Structural Motion Control – Control System Analysis
A control system provides feedback (output) to an input. This is useful to model an Active Mass Damper (AMD).
The modelling of a control system involves the definition of an input-output relationship, i.e. a transfer function.
This can be defined using the TF bulk data entry. Nonlinearities can be simulated via the NOLINi entries with
which nonlinear transient loads are expressed as functions of displacements or velocities. Complex eigenvalue
analysis can be used to determine stability when control systems include damping and unsymmetrical matrices.
875
Second Edition
5.8 Fibre Reinforced Polymer (FRP) Analysis and Design 17
5.8.1 Introduction
A Fibre Reinforced Polymer (FRP) composite laminate is a material composed of plies. Each ply consists of
fibres within a polymer matrix with the addition of additives. The fibres impart strength and stiffness to the
composite and also act as crack stoppers for good fatigue resistance. The matrix binds the fibres together,
transferring loads from fibre to fibre. The matrix also protects the fibres from mechanical abrasion and chemical
reactions with the environment. The mechanical properties are predominantly governed by the fibres; fibre type,
fibre length, fibre volume fraction and fibre orientation. The chemical properties, behaviour in fire and durability
are largely governed by the properties of the matrix polymer. Together, the FRP composite presents a robust
material solution with good stiffness/weight and strength/weight ratios, good fatigue and corrosion resistance and
favorable cost savings in transportation, assembly and construction due to its relatively light weight despite its
unfavorable material cost / weight ratio.
5.8.2 The Reinforcement Fibre
Property Glass Carbon Aramid (Kevlar TM)

Tensile Strength, E-Glass: 2500 HT-Carbon: 3200
2900
σf, ult (MPa) R-Glass: 3200 HM-Carbon: 2500
Compressive Strength,
σf, ult (MPa)
E-Glass: HT-Carbon:
Efℓ = 74 Efℓ = 230
Eft = 74 Eft = 15 Efℓ = 130
Gf = 30 Gf = 50 Eft = 5.4
Stiffness (GPa) R-Glass: HM-Carbon: Gf = 12
Efℓ = 86 Efℓ = 390 Aramid fibre is
Eft = Eft = 6 anisotropic.
Gf = Gf = 20
Glass fibre is isotropic. Carbon fibre is anisotropic.
E-Glass: 0.25 HT-Carbon: 0.3
Poisson’s Ratio, νf 0.4
R-Glass: 0.2 HM-Carbon: 0.35
Low; Very Low;
Density, ρf (kg/m3) E-Glass: 2600 HT-Carbon: 1750 Very Low; 1450
R-Glass: 2500 HM-Carbon: 1800
Material Cost 18
Low; 2.5 High; 10.0 – 200.0 High; 20.0
₤ / kg
Coefficient of Thermal Low; Very low;
Low;
Expansion, αf E-Glass: 0.5E-5 HT-Carbon: 0.02E-5
-0.2E-5
(Strain/°C) R-Glass: 0.3E-5 HM-Carbon: 0.08E-5
Impact Resistance
Dependent upon elastic Dependent upon elastic Dependent upon elastic
(Brittle Failure
strain energy absorbed; strain energy absorbed; strain energy absorbed;
Toughness)
Fatigue See Section 5.8.3.
Retain strength up till Oxidise in air above 650 Limited to 200 °C.
Fire
melting point (over 1000 °C. Combustible. Combustible.
17
GAY, Daniel, HOA, Suong, TSAI, Stephen. Composite Materials Design and Application. CRC Press, London, 2003.
18
NB: Cost reductions are however made in erection and transportation due to the lighter weight.
876
Second Edition
°C). Combustible.
Susceptible only when in

contact with aluminium
Corrosion Resistance Not susceptible. causing a “galvanic Not susceptible.
phenomenon” which leads
to rapid corrosion.
Creep
Coefficient of Thermal Low; Very high;
Conductivity at 20°C, λ E-Glass: 1 HT-Carbon: 200 Very low; 0.03
(W/m°C) R-Glass: 1 HM-Carbon: 200
Heat Capacity, c E-Glass: 800 HT-Carbon: 800
1400
(J/kg°C) R-Glass: 800 HM-Carbon: 800
Electrical Conductivity Non-conducting. Conducting. Non-conducting.
Aramids absorb much
Attacked by alkalis (pH more water than either
Chemical Resistance greater than 11) but not by Good. glass or carbon causing
acids. problems with the
resin/fibre interface.
Changes colour and the
strength reduce. However,
UV Resistance Good. Good. when embedded in resin,
overall mechanical
properties little affected.
Non-toxic and inert. Does Non-toxic and inert. Does Non-toxic and inert. Does
Sustainability not contaminate not contaminate not contaminate
groundwater. groundwater. groundwater.
Transparency to Radio
Frequency
Electromagnetic
Considerations
877
Second Edition
5.8.3 The Polymer (Resin) Matrix
There are two types of polymer; thermosets and thermoplastics. Once cured (hardened) by a chemical reaction, a
thermosetting polymer will not melt or soften when subsequently heated. A thermoplastic polymer softens when
heated and hardens upon cooling. Common thermoset polymers are polyester, epoxy and phenolic.
Property Polyester Epoxy Phenolic

Tensile Strength,
80 130 70
σm, ult (MPa)
Compressive Strength,
σm, ult (MPa)
Em: 4.5 Em: 4.5 Em: 3.0
Stiffness (GPa) Gm: 1.4 Gm: 1.6 Gm: 1.1
Polyester is isotropic. Epoxy is isotropic. Phenolic is isotropic.
Poisson’s Ratio, νm 0.4 0.4 0.4
Density, ρm (kg/m3) 1200 1200 1300

Material Cost
2.5 5.0 – 10.0 10.0
₤ / kg
Coefficient of Thermal
Expansion, αm High; 8E-5 High; 11E-5 Low; 1E-5
(Strain/°C)
Impact Resistance
(Brittle Failure
Toughness)
Fatigue resistance of FRP composites is generally better than that of metals as the
fibres act as crack stoppers - up to 1000000 cycles no fatigue limit. Unlike metals,
Fatigue fatigue failure is gradual as the matrix cracks and fibres debond. Generally, non-
propagating stress range estimates for composites can be as high as 90% of static
strength (cf. that for steel and titanium being 50% and aluminium 35%).
Although the fibres are not flammable, the polymer matrix is inherently flammable.
Although thermoset polymers do not melt when heated, they do soften (Young’s
Modulus decreases) above the glass transition temperature Tg, typically 60 – 70 °C.
Fire
This greatly influences the maximum service temperature of a FRP composite and its
structural performance in a fire. The temperature at which a FRP composite softens is
called the Heat Distortion Temperature (HDT) and is related to Tg.
Corrosion Resistance
All polymers used in FRP composites display viscoelastic or time (and temperature)
dependent properties. Materials with a high glass transition temperature (Tg) have
higher creep resistance. Creep is of primary significance for structures under a
sustained load. Creep in FRP composites is primarily a matrix deformation. A FRP
Creep composite with fibres aligned in the direction of the applied stress, creep is unlikely to
be a significant problem, while loading off axis to the fibre direction may result in
excessive deflection. The design methodology should be based on limiting the internal
strains in the matrix. Axial strain levels should be less than 0.2% strain. Creep curves
are available for estimating creep modulus (long term modulus).
Low; 0.2 Low; 0.2 Low; 0.3
Conductivity at 20°C, λ
878
Second Edition
(W/m°C)
Heat Capacity, c
1400 1000 1000
(J/kg°C)
Electrical Conductivity
Resistant to grease, oils,
Resistant to grease, oils,
paints, solvents, petroleum.
paints, solvents, petroleum.
Epoxy resins can absorb Resistant to grease, oils,
Chemical Resistance Polyester resins attack
water by diffusion up to paints, solvents, petroleum.
polystyrene foam in
6% of mass. Paint thinners
sandwich structures.
attach epoxy resins.
Good. Maintains
appearance > 20 years.
Used as protective gel coat
on composites with a more
UV Resistance UV sensitive polymer.
Appearance changes long
before significant
mechanical property
degradation.
Sustainability
Frequency
An application where it has been particularly useful to use FRP composites is where
concrete members require non-ferrous reinforcement due to electromagnetic
Electromagnetic
considerations e.g. MRI scanner rooms; airport radio and compass calibration pads;
Considerations
high voltage electrical transformer vaults; concrete near high voltage cables and
substations.
879
Second Edition
5.8.4 The Additives
Property Remark
To counteract UV effects on appearance and the degradation of mechanical properties,
additives can be blended with the polymer during processing. Photo stabilizing
additives protect the polymer chains by reacting preferentially with UV light - UV
absorbers. Pigments can also protect the polymer by reflecting the UV radiation.
UV Resistance
Metallic pigments can be used as effective reflectors. Zinc oxide (ZnO) is another
effective reflector. However, the most effective reflector is carbon black. It is often
used to enhance the lifespan of polymers exposed outdoors. Colors that can be
particularly prone to fade include reds, yellows and pastel colors.
880
Second Edition
5.8.5 The Composite Laminate Forming Processes
Forming Process Description

Open molding since there is only one mold.
Contact Molding Reinforcement is mats or fabrics. Compaction is done
(Hand Lay Up) using a roller to squeeze out air pockets. Labour intensive
and high quality workmanship required.
Closed molding as the countermold will close the mold to
Compression Molding apply pressure after impregnated reinforcement (fabrics or
unidimensionals) placed on mold.
Vacuum Assisted Resin
Vacuum is applied under a soft plastic sheet on the open
Transfer Molding VARTM
Molding mold and piece is compacted under atmospheric pressure
(a.k.a. Depression Molding
to elimitate air bubbles.
or Bag Molding)
impregnation of Resin is injected into the preformed reinforcement
fibres into resin Resin Transfer Molding
(unidimensionals, fabrics, mats) placed between the mold
placing mixture RTM
and countermold.
on tool Premixed (a.k.a. Bulk Moulding Compound B.M.C., i.e.
compaction Injection of Premixed
mixture of cut short fibres in a resin matrix) is fed into
polymerization Molding
mold and countermold in a highly automated fashion.
demolding Molding by foam injection allows the processing of
finishing Foam Injection Molding polyurethane foam reinforced with glass fibres in mold
and countermold.
Centrifugal Molding Allows for the fabrication of tubes using short fibres.
Filament winding is used to form tubes with continuous
fibres wound helically within the component. The fibres
are coated with polymer resin and wound around a
Filament Winding
mandrel to create the desired shape. The winding angle
may be varied to orientate the fibres to give the desired
properties in different directions.
Sheet Forming Allows the production of plane or corrugated sheets.
Profile Forming Pultrusion involves pulling reinforcement fibres (unidimensionals, fabrics or mats) coated
(Pultrusion) in a polymer resin through a die.
Only applicable to thermoplastic composites. Preformed plates are heated, stamped and
Stamp Forming
then cooled.
Three
Woven tows along several directions in space assembled before impregnation using liquid
Dimensional
or gas.
Assembly
Cutting A programmed cutting machine can cut components into shapes required by the design.
881
Second Edition
5.8.6 Modelling and Analyzing Fibre Reinforced Polymer (FRP) Composite Laminates in
MSC.NASTRAN
5.8.6.1 The Ply
The reinforcement fibres are manufactured to be as thin in diameter (d) as possible because their rupture strength
decreases as their diameter increases. The minimum effective fibre length (critical fibre length, lc) is dependent on
the fibre diameter (d) and its ultimate tensile strength, σf, ult and on the fibre-matrix bond strength (or the shear
strength of the matrix) τc according (simplistically) to
lc = σf, ult d / τc
For a number of glass and carbon fibre-matrix combinations, this critical length is on the order of 1 mm, which
ranges between 20 and 150 times the fibre diameter. Fibres for which l >> lc (normally l > 15lc) are termed
continuous; discontinuous or short fibres have lengths shorter than this. For discontinuous fibres of lengths
significantly less than lc, the matrix deforms around the fibre such that there is virtually no stress transfer and little
reinforcement by the fibre.
The forms of the reinforcement fibres are

i. Unidimensional (continuous fibres)
ii. Bidimensional woven fabric (continuous fibres)
iii. Bidimensional mat (short or continuous fibres)
iv. Multidimensional fabric (continuous fibres)
5.8.6.1.1 Mechanical Properties of the Unidimensional Ply
Two dimensional anisotropic materials (MAT2) can be fully defined from 7 independent constants, Ex, Ey, νyx,
νxy, Gxy, Gxz, Gyz.
 Ex ν yx E x 
 0 
1 − ν xy ν yx 1 − ν xy ν yx
σx     ε x  α x 
   ν xy E y Ey      τ xz  G xz 0  γ xz 
σ y  =  0   ε y  − (T − Tref )α y   =  
τ  1 − ν xy ν yx 1 − ν xy ν yx   γ   0  τ yz   0 G yz  γ yz 
 xy   0 0 G xy   xy   
 
 
Two dimensional orthotropic materials (MAT8) can be fully defined from 6 independent constants, 3 from Ex,
Ey, νyx and νxy due to the symmetry relation νxyEy = νyxEx and also Gxy, Gxz, Gyz.
 Ex ν yx E x 
 0 
1 − ν xy ν yx 1 − ν xy ν yx
σx     ε x  α x 
   ν xy E y Ey      τ xz  G xz 0  γ xz 
σ y  =  0   ε y  − (T − Tref )α y   =  
τ  1 − ν xy ν yx 1 − ν xy ν yx   γ   0  τ yz   0 G yz  γ yz 
 xy   0 0 G xy   xy   
 
 
Two dimensional (plane stress) isotropic material (MAT1) can be fully defined from 2 independent constants
from E, G and ν as G = E / [2(1+ν)].
882
Second Edition
 E νE 
0
 σ x  1 − ν 2 1− ν2 
  ε x  α 
   νE νE   τ xz  G 0  γ xz 
σ y  = 0   ε y  − (T − Tref )α   =  
τ   1 − ν 1− ν2    τ yz   0 G  γ yz 
2
 0 
 xy   0 0 G  γ xy   
 
 
A fundamental physical difference in the deformation between an isotropic and an orthotropic material shall be
mentioned. If an isotropic material is stressed, the deformation of the element will be ellipsoidal with the axes of
the ellipsoid coinciding with the principal stress axes. However, if an orthotropic material is stressed, the
deformation of the element will be ellipsoidal with the axes of the ellipsoid not coinciding with the principal stress
axes.
The mechanical properties of a ply are defined on the MAT8 card.
Note that x denotes the longitudinal direction of the ply, y the transverse in plane direction of the ply and z the
transverse out of plane direction of the ply; f denotes fibre and m the resin matrix; fℓ the longitudinal direction of
the fibre and ft the transverse direction of the fibre.
Property of Ply Expression

The longitudinal modulus, Ex (or E1)
(Assumes straight and unidirectional fibre
Ex = EmVm + EfℓVf = Em(1–Vf) + EfℓVf
orientation and that the material is bimodulus, i.e.
same stiffness in tension and compression)
 
 1  1 V V
The in-plane transverse modulus, Ey (or E2) Ey = Em   or = m + f
 (1 − V ) + E m V  E y E m E ft
 f
E
f 
 ft 
The in-plane Poisson’s ratio, νxy (or NU12) νxy = νmVm + νfVf = νm(1–Vf) + νfVf
 
 1 
The in-plane shear modulus, Gxy (or G12) G xy = G m  
 Gm 
 (1 − Vf ) + G Vf 
 f 
If test data are not available, the value of G12 may be
The out-of-plane shear modulus, Gxz (or G1Z) used for G1Z and G2Z. If zero then no shear flexibility
or shear deformations, i.e. infinite shear stiffness.
If test data are not available, the value of G12 may be
The out-of-plane shear modulus, Gyz (or G2Z) used for G1Z and G2Z. If zero then no shear flexibility
or shear deformations, i.e. infinite shear stiffness.
1
The in-plane modulus along any direction, Eθ Eθ =
(Note the rapid decrease in modulus in directions cos θ sin θ
4 4  1 ν xy 
+ + 2 cos 2 θ sin 2 θ − 
away from the longitudinal fibre) Ex Ey  
 2G xy E y 
883
Second Edition
where θ = anticlockwise angle from x

Mass density, ρ (or RHO) ρ = ρmVm + ρfVf = ρm(1–Vf) + ρfVf
The longitudinal coefficient of thermal expansion, α = α f E fλ Vf + α m E m Vm
αx (or A1) E fλ Vf + E m Vm
x
(ν f E m − ν m E fλ )
The transverse coefficient of thermal expansion, αy α y = α m Vm + α f Vf + E m E fλ
(α f − α m )
(or A2) +
Vf Vm
Vf ρ f
Fibre mass fraction, Mf Mf =
Vf ρ f + Vm ρ m
Vf ρ f
Resin matrix mass fraction, Mm Mm =1− Mf =1−
Vf ρ f + Vm ρ m
The fibre volume fraction, Vf depends largely upon the manufacturing process used.
Molding Process Fibre Volume Fraction, Vf

Contact Molding 30%
Compression Molding 40%
Filament Winding 60% − 85%
Vacuum Molding 50% − 80%
Conversely, if the fibre mass fraction Mf is known, the volume fractions can be derived as follows.
Property of Ply Expression

M f / ρf
Fibre volume fraction, Vf Vf =
M f / ρf + M m / ρm
M f / ρf
Resin matrix volume fraction, Vm Vm = 1 − Vf =
M f / ρf + M m / ρm
The thickness of the plies must be defined on the PCOMP card (for each individual PSHELL card) as Ti. The
thickness is obtained as follows.
m 1 1  1 − M f 
Ti = of or Ti = m of  +  
Vf ρ f  ρ f ρ m  M f 
where mof is the mass of fibre per m2 of area.
5.8.6.1.2 Mechanical Properties of the Bidimensional Woven Fabric Ply
The fabrics are made of fibres oriented along two perpendicular directions, one called the warp and the other
called the fill direction. The fibres are woven together, which means that the fill yarns pass over and under the warp
yarns, following a fixed pattern. Each fabric layer is considered to be a single anisotropic layer of thickness Ti with
approximate mechanical properties as follows. Define
n1
k=
n1 + n 2
where n1 is the number of warps yarns per metre and n2 is the number of fill yarns per metre. Then
Exfabric ≈ kEx + (1–k)Ey
Eyfabric ≈ (1–k)Ex + kEy
884
Second Edition
Gxyfabric ≈ Gxy
ν xy
ν xyfabric ≈
Ex
k + (1 − k )
Ey
where Ex, Ey, Gxy and νxy are values obtained by considering the woven fabric ply to be a unidirectional ply, i.e.
with both the warp and fill yarns to be in the same direction such that the total volume fraction, Vf would be the
same as that of one unidirectional ply. Note that the stiffness of a woven fabric will be less than two equivalent
(with the two unidirectional plies having the same fibre volume fraction as the one woven fabric ply) unidirectional
plies orthogonal to one another because of the curvature of the woven fibres over and under the orthogonal fibres.
The thickness of the anisotropic ply would be Ti as with the unidirectional ply.
5.8.6.1.3 Mechanical Properties of the Bidimensional Mat Ply
Mats are made up of short cut fibres or continuous fibres such that they are isotropic within their plane. Hence their
properties can be approximated by just two constants (and hence using MAT1) approximately as
3 5
E mat ≈ E x + E y
8 8
E mat
G mat ≈
2(1 + ν mat )
ν mat ≈ 0.3
where Ex and Ey are the elastic moduli along the longitudinal and transverse directions of a unidirectional ply with
the same volume fraction Vf.
The thickness of the mat ply would be Ti as with the unidirectional ply.
5.8.6.1.4 Mechanical Properties of the Multidimensional Fabric Ply
Multidimensional fabric plies has the reinforcement assembled according to pre-established directions. The ply is
isotropic within its plane.
885
Second Edition
5.8.6.2 The Composite Laminate, Sandwich Structures and Structural Members with Attached Laminates
There are three types of laminated construction. These include the all laminated construction consisting of
relatively high stiffness and strength layers, the sandwich structure lamination consisting of at least two high
stiffness and strength outer layers connected by a core, and a third type consisting of a structural member that is
reinforced on the tensile or compression or both sides of a flexural beam.
5.8.6.2.1 Mechanical Properties of the Composite Laminate
A composite laminate is comprised of a number of plies. These can be defined using the PCOMP entry that refers
to the material cards of the individual plies MIDi, their thickness Ti and the orientation of the ply longitudinal axis
from the MCID by THETAi.
Plies are always defined bottom up (Z0 = −0.5 x total element thickness ∑Ti). There is a genuine need for a
midplane symmetry (ensured by specifying LAM = “SYM”) because during the cooling process of manufacture,
the plies have the tendency to contract differently depending on their orientations. With symmetry of the midplane,
nonuniform contraction is avoided.
[ ]
Typical laminate lay-ups of unidirectional plies are [90/02/−45/45]S and 0 / 45 / − 45 / 90 S . Note that these are
defined bottom up. The S-subscript indicates a set of symmetric plies. The 2-subscript indicates two plies. The
[ ]
hyphen above the number indicates that it is the midplane ply. The 0 / 45 / − 45 / 90 S lay-up is really the
technological minimum with the minimum thickness of the laminate being around 1mm. The plies should be
orientated such that there are fibres orientated in both the maximum and minimum principal stress directions. There
should also be no more than 4 consecutive plies along the same direction. The plies should be progressively
terminated to obtain a gradual change of thickness (maximum 2 plies for each 6mm interval).
Laminate lay-up which are symmetric can also be made up of fabrics, which can be thought of as a pair of
orthogonal plies and also of mats, which are isotropic in-plane.
5.8.6.2.2 Mechanical Properties of Sandwich Structures
Sandwich structures are made up of two facings sandwiching a light flexible core, hence again definable with a
PCOMP entry. The facing can be a composite laminate of many anisotropic MAT8 plies or simply a layer of
isotropic MAT1 material such as aluminium. The core can be deemed as just another layer within PCOMP with a
relatively much greater thickness.
A significant benefit of sandwich structures is the fact that they are extremely light whilst having a high flexural
rigidity due to the separation of the surface skins. The mass per unit area of the dome of the Saint Peter’s Basilica
in Rome (45m diameter) is 2600 kg/m2 whereas the same dome made of steel/polyurethane foam sandwich
(Hanover) is only 33 kg/m2.
Very approximate stress formulae in a 3 layer (core T2 sandwiched by 2 facings of thickness T1 and T3) sandwich
structure are as follows. These are useful verifications of computer outputs.
886
Second Edition
M (per unit metre)

Bending stress in facings σ =
(
T2 + 1 (T1 + T3 ) (1m width )
2
)
assuming all bending is resisted by the facings
V (per unit metre)

Shear stress in foam τ = assuming all the vertical shear is resisted by the core
T2 (1m width )
The approximate verification of displacements requires the estimation of the stiffness of the sandwich structure.
Also, both bending and shear deformations may be significant, hence both bending and shear stiffnesses must be
approximated as follows. Note that T2 is the thickness of the core and Tfacings is the thickness of the facings, i.e. T1
or T3.
width . skin thickness . (average panel depth )2 (
width . Tfacings . T2 + Tfacings )
2
EI = E facings = E facings
2 2
( )
GA s = G core T2 + 2Tfacngs . width
Sandwich structures are susceptible to global buckling according to Euler (including shear deformations) as
π 2 EI
Fcr = K
EI
L2 + π 2 K
GA s
where K = 1 for simply supported, K = 4 for fixed ended, K = 2.04 for fixed-pinned and K = 0.25 for cantilever.
Sandwich structures are particularly susceptible to local buckling of the facings. The critical compression stress is
σ cr =
3
( 2
)
1/ 3
[ ]
E facings E core
12(3 − ν core ) (1 + ν core )
2 2 1/ 3
The axial critical force in a beam for local buckling of the facings is approximately
1/ 2
 E Tfacings 
Fcr = 1.64Tfacings .width.E facings  core 
 E facings T2 
 
5.8.6.2.3 Mechanical Properties of Structural Members with Attached Laminates
This is utilized most often in construction and infrastructure applications. PCOMP can be used to define the
attached composite laminates on the flanges of the structural members, but of course not the structural members
themselves because the orientation of the web will be orthogonal to the orientation of the flange. Hence define
explicit PSHELL entries for the structural members.
887
Second Edition
5.8.6.3 Failure Mode and Failure Criteria of the Composite Laminate
The failure mode of a ply is brittle rather than ductile with no significant yielding until failure at the ultimate
tensile strength. The ply remains elastic until the ultimate limit strength. In light of this it has been assumed that
only elastic methods may be used, with no redistribution. If the loading is tensile along the direction of the fibres, it
is assumed that the fibres break before the matrix. The compressive strength along the direction of the fibres will be
smaller than the tensile strength along the same direction due to the micro buckling phenomenon of the fibres in
the matrix.
To define a failure criteria a failure theory must be specified on the FT field of the PCOMP entry from either
“HILL” for Hill-Tsai, “HOFF” for Hoffman, “TSAI” for Tsai-Wu or “STRN” for maximum strain theory. The
allowable inter-laminar shear stress SB needs also to be provided in the PCOMP card in case of inter-laminar
failure. Then on the MAT8 cards, the allowable stress or strain in tension and compression in longitudinal direction
Xt, Xc, in the transverse direction Yt, Yc and the allowable stress or strain for in-place shear, S is required.
Hill-Tsai is really for orthotropic materials with equal strengths in tension and compression. The Hoffmann and
Tsai-Wu theory are for orthotropic materials with general state of plane stress with unequal strengths in tension and
compression. Note that the Hoffmann theory takes into account the difference in tensile and compressive allowable
stresses by using linear terms in its equation. The Tsai-Wu however is complicated by the need to satisfy a stability
criterion with an experimentally (biaxial loading) derived parameter F12 defined on the MAT8 card.
Narayanaswami and Adelman have thus suggested that F12 be set to zero and the use of Hoffman's Theory or the
Tsai-Wu theory with F12 = 0 are preferred alternatives. STRN on the MAT8 with a value of “1.0” is additionally
required for the maximum strain theory to indicate that Xt, Xc, Yt, Yc and S are strain allowables, instead of stress
allowables for the other criteria.
888
Second Edition
The maximum strain criteria failure index is defined as follows
STRN can also be left blank (as done for the other criteria) even for the maximum strain theory to allow stress
allowables in which case the maximum strain criteria becomes the maximum stress criteria. For this case the
failure indices are calculated using
The failure index of the bonding material will be calculated as the maximum interlaminar shear stress divided by
the allowable bonding stress. Classical lamination theory, which utilizes the plane stress assumption, does not
account for interlaminar stresses. As a result, this theory cannot be used to predict the magnitude of these stresses.
High values of these interlaminar stresses can lead to failures that are unique to composite materials. An
approximate technique is used to calculate the interlaminar shear stresses. The basic assumption in this approximate
technique is that the x- and y-components of stress are decoupled from one another. The interlaminar shear strains
are calculated by
The Hill-Tsai failure criterion is defined as follows for each and every ply.
2 2 2
 σ   σ  σ σ  τ 
α=  x  + y  − x y +  xy  < 1.0 for no ply rupture
σ   σ y , ult  σ x , ult  τ xy, ult
2 
 x , ult    
 E 
where σ x, ult = σ f, ult Vf + (1 − Vf ) m  ≈ σ f, ult Vf
 E fλ 
These correspond to the entries on the MAT8 cards, the allowable stress in tension and compression in longitudinal
direction Xt (σx, ult), Xc (σx, ult), in the transverse direction Yt (σy, ult), Yc (σy, ult) and the allowable stress for in-place
shear, S (τxy, ult). If α > 1, then rupture occurs in the ply considered, generally due to the rupture of the resin. The
rupture resistance does not have the same value in tension and compression, hence it is useful to place in the
denominators of the Hill-Tsai expression the rupture resistance values corresponding to the mode of loading (i.e.
whether tension or compression) that appear in the numerator. This is done automatically in NASTRAN as follows.
889
Second Edition
5.8.6.4 MSC.NASTRAN Finite Element Modelling of Composite Laminate Summary
Classical lamination theory is employed, hence incorporating the following assumptions:

i. The laminate consists of perfectly bonded laminae or ply.
ii. The bonds are infinitesimally thin and nonshear-deformable; i.e., displacements are continuous
across laminae (or ply) boundaries so that no lamina can slip relative to another.
iii. Each of the ply is in a state of plane stress.
The PCOMP property card is used for modelling a composite material consisting of layers. This information is
used internally within NASTRAN to compute equivalent PSHELL cards. The information on the PCOMP card
includes the thickness, orientation and material identification of each layer. This information is used internally
within NASTRAN to compute equivalent PSHELL cards. Special layer-by-layer output is provided when the
PCOMP option is used. We have said that for shells, the element definition and element stress recovery are
performed in the element coordinate system by default (but defined by MCID entry on element connection
card; 0 for basic projected, > 0 for user projected, < blank > for element coordinate system, > 0.0 and <
360.0 for angled from side n1-n2 of element). (Note that for beams, the element definition and element stress
recovery are performed in the element coordinate system. For solid elements, the element definition and element
stress recovery are performed in the basic coordinate system by default (but defined on CORDM field of
PSOLID; 0 for basic, > 0 for user-defined, -1 for element coordinate system)). In the case of the PCOMP entry,
the element coordinate system requires further subdivision as there are many plies. Hence the THETAi field of the
PCOMP entry specifies the angle from the coordinate system defined by MCID on the element connection card for
the longitudinal axis of each ply i.
To define laminates with PCOMP and numerous orthotropic MAT8 cards, the following procedure is undertaken.
I. Define a common material coordinate system MCID for the CQUAD4 elements. This would refer to either the
basic coordinate system (by specifying “0”) or a user-defined coordinate system (by specifying a CORDij ID).
In the usual case of uniform isotropic shells, MCID can be left defaulted to the individual element coordinate
system (by specifying < blank >), random as they may be, because due to the nature of the elements being
uniform and isotropic, the geometric definition will be the exact, and the correct consistent stress recovery will
be obtained so long as the stresses are rotated onto the global axes system by the post-processor (of course
though the Z-normal must still be ensured to be coherent amongst adjacent elements for correct stress recovery
of top and bottom surfaces). But in the case of the orthotropic shell, the geometric definition requires a
coordinate system. It is best to define a single user defined coordinate system for all the elements on their
MCID field, noting that the element coordinate system will then be the projection of the defined system onto
the element plane. The thickness T1 to T4 should not be specified because in accordance with normal practice
of defining isotropic materials, thickness is specified in the property card.
II. Define a PCOMP card that refers to the material cards of the individual plies MIDi, their thickness Ti and the
orientation of the ply longitudinal axis from the MCID, THETAi. Plies are always defined bottom up (Z0 =
−0.5 x total element thickness ∑Ti). SOUTi field requests by “YES” or “NO” stress output for the individual
plies provided that the ELSTRESS case control command is specified. The LAM field specifies the laminate
option from < blank > for explicitly specifying all plies, the recommended “SYM” for specifying half the
symmetrical plies from bottom side (with centerline ply of half thickness if odd-number of plies within
laminate), “MEM” for specifying all the plies but with membrane stiffness only (MID1 on derived PSHELL)
and “BEND” for specifying all the plies but with bending stiffness only (MID2 on derived PSHELL). A
failure theory FT can be specified from “HILL” for Hill-Tsai, “HOFF” for Hoffman, “TSAI” for Tsai-Wu or
“STRN” for maximum strain theory. The allowable inter-laminar shear stress SB needs to be provided.
890
Second Edition
III. Define an orthotropic MAT8 card (although a MAT1 card could be used for a mat ply) for each individual ply.
For each ply, need to define E1, E2, Poisson’s ratio NU12, in-plane shear modulus G12, transverse shear
modulus for shear in 1-Z plane G1Z, transverse shear modulus for shear in 2-Z plane G2Z (if G1Z and G2Z
zero, then no shear flexibility or shear deformations, i.e. infinite shear stiffness) and density RHO. Define the
thermal expansion coefficients A1 and A2 if necessary. If the failure criterion is requested in PCOMP (in field
FT), then the allowable stress or strain in tension and compression in longitudinal direction Xt, Xc, in the
transverse direction Yt, Yc and the allowable stress or strain for in-place shear, S is required. F12 is
additionally required for Tsai-Wu failure criterion. STRN with a value of “1.0” is additionally required for the
maximum strain theory to indicate that Xt, Xc, Yt, Yc and S are strain allowables instead of stress allowables.
STRN can also be left blank (as done for the other criteria) even for the maximum strain theory to allow stress
allowables in which case the maximum strain criteria becomes the maximum stress criteria.
Safety factors vary considerably depending upon laminate design, constituent materials, manufacturing method,
service conditions, etc. However, as a rule of thumb, a conservative value of 3 can be used for the material factor.
The following are the MSC.NASTRAN recovered outputs:-

i. stress (ELSTRESS) and strain (ELSTRAIN) for the equivalent laminate shell
ii. force resultants (ELFORCE)
iii. stresses and strains in the individual plies and the shear stress in the bonding material
iv. a failure index table (if Xt, Xc, Yt, Yc and S specified on MAT8 and FT and SB specified on
PCOMP)
The failure index for an element is the largest value of the failure indices for all plies of the element.
891
Second Edition
6 FINITE ELEMENT MODELLING TECHNIQUES AND MSC.NASTRAN CARDS COMMON TO

ALL ANALYSES
NASTRAN was originally developed by NASA for the space program at the end of the 1960’ s. It is an extremely
sophisticated and complicated general-purpose finite element analysis program.
6.1 Input Deck .dat Format
A NASTRAN input file is a .dat file. There are 3 input formats. In the small-field fixed format, each card of 10
fields has fields of 8 characters each. In the large-field fixed format, each card of 6 fields has fields of 16 characters
except the first and the last which is still 8 characters. The large-field format is denoted by having an asterisk (*)
immediately following the card name in the first field. The fields in the free-field format are separated by commas
and their accuracy is similar to the small-field fixed format. Hence, real numbers greater than 8 characters will lose
precision when in the free-field format. The Bulk Data Section can utilize any format, whilst the other sections
utilize the free-field format. $ in the very first column denotes a comment line. The entries for the fixed format
cards may be anywhere within the Field except for entries in Field 1 and 10 which must be left-justified. The first
field gives the card name whilst the last field is reserved as a continuation field. It is important to ensure that the
right data type (between Integer, Real or Character) is entered; Integers cannot contain a decimal point, Reals must
contain a decimal point and Characters can be alphanumeric although must start with an alpha character and must
be equal or less than 8 characters. NASTRAN will not proceed with the analysis if the wrong type of data is
detected. Continuation cards are best automatically generated by leaving the last field of the initial card and first
field of the next card blank. Automatic continuation cards are not generated for the large-field format, hence must
be entered manually. Never leave blank lines as they will just be ignored. Hence, if a deck consists of 3 cards and
the second line is left blank, the third card will be taken as the second card. The format of the input deck is shown
as follows.
All elements in the model should have unique element IDs, even elements of different types. The formulation of the
element stiffness matrix is independent of how the element grid points are numbered. However, each element will
have an element coordinate system which is defined by how the element grid points are numbered.

ID <8 character string>,<any length character string>
TIME <max execution time in CPU minutes>,<max I/O time in seconds>
CEND
$
TITLE = < TITLE OF JOB >
SUBTITLE = < SUBTITLE OF JOB >
LABEL = < LABEL OF JOB >
$
………
$
$ BULK DATA
BEGIN BULK
$
………
$
ENDDATA
The .f06 file should be checked for USER FATAL error messages, which crashes the analysis and USER WARNING
error messages, which affects accuracy but does not crash the analysis. Also USER INFORMATION messages
892
Second Edition
should be read. The .f04 file contains all data associated with the execution of the solution sequence along with
system parameters such as memory and disk usage. It also lists the allocation of files. Generally the most useful
information in the .f04 file is the total scratch database size. This should be recorded and used when subsequently
running models of a similar size. Search for the string MAXIMUM DISK USAGE. The .acct file is the job
accounting file and contains useful data such as elapsed time, cpu time, maximum memory used etc. This data can
be useful in planning other, similar jobs in future. If the job is very large then the I/O performance can be assessed
by looking at the ratio of cpu to elapsed time.
Displacement vector sets in NASTRAN define the equations of motion and are partitioned in the following ways.
(i) g-set is the unconstrained set of structural equations
(ii) the g-set is partitioned into the m-set pertaining to the dependent set of DOFs and the n-set pertaining to
the independent set of DOFs
g-set − m-set = n-set
(iii) the n-set is then partitioned into s-set pertaining to the constrained DOFs and the f-set pertaining to the
unconstrained DOFs
n-set − s-set = f-set
(iv) the f-set is partitioned into the o-set pertaining to the DOFs eliminated by static condensation and the
a-set pertaining to the a-set (analysis set) pertaining to the DOFs not eliminated by static condensation
f-set − o-set = a-set
(v) the a-set is partitioned into the q-set pertaining to the generalized coordinates in Generalized Dynamic
Reduction (GDR) or component mode synthesis and the t-set pertaining to the physical DOFs
a-set − q-set = t-set
(vi) the t-set is partitioned into the r-set pertaining to the SUPORT DOFs and the l-set pertaining to DOFs
not placed in a SUPORT entry
t-set − r-set = l-set
(vii) the l-set is partitioned into the c-set pertaining to the free boundary set for component mode synthesis
or dynamic reduction and the b-set pertaining to the coordinates fixed for component mode analysis or
dynamic reduction
l-set − c-set = b-set
Some additional sets include
(i) the e-set representing the extra dynamic DOFs from control systems and other nonstructural physical
variables
(ii) the sa-set representing the permanently constrained aerodynamic points in aeroelastic analysis
(iii) the k-set representing the aerodynamic points in aerodynamic analysis
Hence, some combined sets include
(i) the d-set which is a combination of the a-set and the e-set
a-set + e-set = d-set
(ii) the fe-set which is a combination of the f-set and the e-set
f-set + e-set = fe-set
(iii) the ne-set which is a combination of the n-set and the e-set
n-set + e-set = ne-set
(iv) the p-set which is a combination of the g-set and the e-set
g-set + e-set = p-set
(v) the ps-set which is a combination of the p-set and the sa-set
p-set + sa-set = ps-set
(vi) the pa-set which is a combination of the ps-set and the k-set
ps-set + k-set = pa-set
The output can be printed (into ASCII .f06), punched (into ASCII .pch) or plotted (into binary .op2). The ASCII
output can also be outputted in a XY format for simplicity if desired. To print into the ASCII .f06, punch into the
ASCII .pch or plot into the binary .op2, the relevant output commands are specified, depicted for example as
follows.
893
Second Edition
DISPLACEMENT (<SORT1/SORT2>, <PRINT,PUNCH,PLOT>, <REAL/PHASE>) = ALL/<Grid Set ID>
Further, to request binary plotted output, the format of the .op2 file must be specified.
PARAM, POST, -2
The output coordinate system can be in the basic coordinate system or the global coordinate system.
PARAM, OUGCORD, BASIC
To request simple XY output to be either printed or punched, the following is specified. Note that within the
XYPLOT section, the format of the output (i.e. whether Real and Imaginary or Magnitude and Phase) where
relevant is determined by that which is specified in the general output request, here DISP. The output set of the
general output request DISP does not need to reference the grids whose component outputs are being plotted out in
the XYPLOT, thus only the format is taken. Note however that the general output request must specify PLOT. If
only the XYPLOT is desired and not the binary .op2 file, the PARAM, POST should just not be specified. Failure
to specify the general output request would result in the default format for the XYPLOT. Also note that the
XYPLOT section must be the very last request in the Case Control Section.

DISPLACEMENT (<PLOT>,<REAL/PHASE>) = ALL/<Grid Set ID>
$ XY plot output
OUTPUT(XYPLOT)
XYPRINT DISP RESPONSE <subcase>/<Grid ID>(<T1/T2/T3><RM/IP>)
XYPUNCH DISP RESPONSE <subcase>/<Grid ID>(<T1/T2/T3><RM/IP>)
A useful output option is stress sorting. Stress sorting is useful to limit the amount of output to say stresses in
elements that only exceed a certain stress criteria. Stress sorting can be performed in MSC.NASTRAN for SOL
101, SOL 109 and SOL 112 using a few parameters. To enable stress sorting
PARAM, S1, 1 $ Enables stress sorting
To limit the printed and plotted stresses to include only those in the highest 400 say elements
PARAM, NUMOUT, 400 say
If NUMOUT, 0 is specified, then stresses in all element greater than BIGER say 200000 Pa is printed and plotted.
PARAM, BIGER, 200000 say
PARAM, SRTOPT controls the sorting method based on maximum or minimum magnitude or maximum or
minimum algebraic value. The default is to sort based on maximum magnitude. PARAM, SRTELTYP specifies the
element type, default being all elements. Stress sorting is based upon different stress parameters for different
element types. For instance the default stress quantity for CQUAD4 is von Mises on the Z2 surface. The default
stress parameters may be changed using the DTI, INDTA bulk data entry.
894
Second Edition
6.2 Grid Cards
$ BULK DATA
GRID ID CP X1 X2 X3 CD PS SEID
CP is the spatial coordinate system (basic coordinate system (0) or a local user-defined coordinate system)
CD is the DOF, output, constraints and solution vector coordinate system (basic coordinate system (0) or a local
user-defined coordinate system)
There are three coordinate systems in NASTRAN, namely: -
(a) the basic coordinate system, i.e. an implicitly defined rectangular default coordinate system
(b) local user–defined coordinate systems which can be rectangular, cylindrical or spherical
(c) element coordinate systems
The global coordinate system in NASTRAN is defined as all the coordinate systems defined in the CD field. Hence
the global coordinate system, which is the system in which the structural matrices are assembled, is really a
collection of basic and local coordinate systems. Classical finite element books state that element stiffness matrices
are generated in the element coordinate system and then transformed into a unique coordinate system, which they
call the global coordinate system, in NASTRAN the basic coordinate system. NASTRAN on the other hand,
generates the element stiffness matrices in the element coordinate system, then instead of transforming that into the
unique basic coordinate system, these matrices are transformed into the coordinate system specified on the CD field
for the grid points where the element is attached, hence called the global coordinate system. Hence if the CD field
of all the grid entries are 0 or left blank, then the global coordinate system will be equal to the basic coordinate
system.
The user defined local coordinate systems include: -
Rectangular CORD1R defined by 3 grids

Cylindrical CORD1C defined by 3 grids
Spherical CORD1S defined by 3 grids
Rectangular CORD2R defined by 3 points defined by an independent coordinate system
Cylindrical CORD2C defined by 3 points defined by an independent coordinate system
Spherical CORD2S defined by 3 points defined by an independent coordinate system
If the location of the grids changes then obviously the definitions of the CORD1R, CORD1C and CORD1S local
systems also change.
If a grid point is not attached to the structure in any way, there will be not stiffness contribution to it. It may be that
it is required to define a local coordinate system or an element orientation vector. In this case, the grid point should
be fully constrained, either manually with SPC cards or automatically with AUTOSPC.
895
Second Edition
6.3 Finite Element Modelling Techniques
6.3.1 Nature of the Finite Element Method
Shape functions must for convergence in the limit: -
(i) permit rigid body motion of the element i.e. zero strain or stress condition (satisfied by having a
constant term in the interpolation function)
(ii) have its strains at least defined (constant strain or stress condition), although not necessarily
continuous between elements. A constant stress condition is necessary for convergence since, in
the limit, if an element is made infinitesimally small, it will then correctly represent the stress at a
point, which is constant. For Euler-Bernoulli bending, a continuity of Ch-1 = C2-1 = C1 (where h is
the highest derivative order of the displacement in the governing differential equation) is required.
For Timoshenko bending, C0 is sufficient. For plane stress, C0 is sufficient. C0 implies that inter-
element continuity of displacement is required but not any of its derivatives, hence strains and
stresses are not continuous between elements.
It has been said that as a mesh of displacement based compatible finite elements is refined, the unknown nodal
displacement estimates will converge monotonically. If the form of loading is by point forces or surface pressures,
then the finite element solution will converge from a stiffer response to the exact solution in the limit. Conversely,
if the loading is in terms of applied displacement or strains (such as support movements or thermal loads), then the
finite element response will converge from a more flexible response to the exact solution in the limit.
The exact solution of the differential equation satisfies equilibrium and compatibility everywhere. The nature of the
finite element solution on the other hand is as follows.
(i) Compatibility satisfies at nodes naturally when the elements are connected at common nodes
(ii) Equilibrium satisfied at nodes as the equation of static or dynamic equilibrium requires; that for a
linear static analysis is {P} = [K] {U}
(iii) Compatibility satisfied within the elements because of the continuous polynomial interpolation,
unless under-integration of the element stiffness matrix is made.
(iv) Compatibility should be satisfied across inter-element boundaries barring poor user meshing. For
compatibility, the displacement function must be continuous across element boundaries, i.e. at least
C0 continuity at these boundaries. Inter-element C0 continuity is satisfied for standard TRIA3,
TRIA6, QUAD4, QUAD8, HEX8 and HEX20 elements. Compatibility is not satisfied when a
QUAD4 is connected to the mid-side nodes of a QUAD8 or a TRIA3 to the mid-side nodes of a
QUAD8 and other poorly formed connections or mesh transitions. Note however that QUAD8
connected to a TRIA6 will ensure compatibility. A good mesh transition for refinement is simply
to use QUADs (instead of TRIAs) throughout the transition.
(v) Equilibrium is usually NOT satisfied within the element
(vi) Equilibrium is NOT satisfied at or across element boundaries of C0 elements but is across C1
elements.
With mesh refinement, the results will converge to the true solution for displacements and stresses. Stress analysis
requires a much finer mesh density than static displacement response. This is because of the rate of convergence of
displacement response being much greater than that of the stress.
896
Second Edition
6.3.2 Finite Element Displacement Interpolation Function, Output Stress Variation, and Corresponding
Order of Error in Displacement and Stress
Discretization of the continuum structure with appropriate finite elements is crucial. Interpolation function or the
shape functions of an element define the variation of displacement within the element. It is of paramount
importance to understand the nature of deformations that can be modeled by certain finite elements.
For a simple beam element, the axial deformation differential equation is
du
F = AE (Engineers Axial Theory σ = F/A = Edu/dx)
dx
The bending deformation differential equation is
d 2u
EI =M (Engineers Bending Theory σ/y = M/I = E/R = Ed2u/dx2)
dx 2
The shear deformation differential equation is
du V
= (Engineers Shear Theory τ = VQ/(Ib) or on average V/As = Gdu/dx)
dx GA s
The torsion deformation differential equation is
dφ
GJ =T (Engineers Torsion Theory τ/r = T/J = Gdφ/dx)
dx
These are also epitomized in the virtual work (unit load method) expression to find deflections of systems.

= f1 ' δ 1
 M1   P1  P L  T1   V1 Q 
= ∫ (M )1 V
 ds  +
 EI  R
∫ (P )1 V
 ds  or (P1 )V  1  +
 EA  R  EA  R
∫ (T )
1 V
 ds  +
 GK t  R
∫ (V )
1 V
 ds 
 GIb  R
   
 P1spring   M 1spring   T1spring 
(
+ P1spring ) 
V 
(
 + M 1spring )
V
 (
 + T1spring )
V
 
 k spring R  k rotational   k torsional 
 spring R  spring R
= M1∫ EI ∫
EA EA GK t GIb∫
ds + P1 1 ds or P1 1 + T1 1 ds + V1 1 ds + P1sp
k sp ∫
+ M 1sp
k rot sp
+ T1sp
k tor sp
The shear deformation expression is often simplified from VQ/(GIb) to V/(GAs).
By definition, EA is the axial rigidity, EI is the flexural rigidity (often denoted D), GAs is the shear rigidity and GJ
or GKt is the torsional rigidity (often denoted H). For isotropic materials, G is always E/[2(1+ν)].
897
Second Edition
6.3.2.1 One Dimensional Beam Finite Element
Beam elements such as CBAR should only be used if plane sections remain plane and the neutral axis remains
strain free. If an open section clearly warps (plane section no longer plane), then shell elements should be used.
Apart from that, small deflection theory must be applicable. Beam theory can be based upon the Bernoulli-Euler
beam (also known as the classical or engineering beam) or the Timoshenko beam, the latter of which includes shear
deformations.
Beam elements have in general 6 DOFs in their two end nodes. A 2-noded beam element describes in its
displacement vector {y}, a 3rd order complete polynomial
transverse displacement = constant + x + x2 + x3
variation in one variable x due to the four (two transverse translational and two rotational) nodal DOFs. Writing the
transverse displacement in terms of shape functions (with natural coordinates),
the transverse displacement
Its strain vector {ε} thus contains a linear variation of curvature (which is defined as the second derivative of the
transverse displacement with respect to x along the element). Subsequently, the stress vector {σ} also contains a
linear variation of bending moment. Note that the strain for a beam finite element is the curvature and the stress is
the bending moment. Note that the required continuity between the finite elements is C2-1 = C1 since the second
derivative of the displacement needs to be defined. The second derivative (which is the curvature) and hence the
bending moment will thus be continuous between elements. If the bending moment variation is accurate, so will be
the shear force distribution, which is the first derivative of the bending moment. A two-noded beam can model
concentrated external forces and moments applied at its nodes exactly because the displacement variation will be
cubic, the curvature will be parabolic and the bending moment linear. This is the reason that concentrated loads
should never be applied within a beam finite element as the resulting bending moment variation will be piecewise
linear, a variation that cannot be modeled by a continuous linear function. Likewise a uniformly distributed load
within a beam finite element will require at least a quartic (4th order) displacement variation function and parabolic
bending moment variation function, both of which cannot be modeled by a two-noded beam element. Note
however that a three-noded beam element will be able to model a uniformly distributed variation in internal load
898
Second Edition
exactly because the resulting displacement variation will be quintic (5th order) and the resulting bending moment
variation will be cubic. If the variation in the displacement function or the stress function is not able to model the
actual variation in reality (which is dependent upon the variation of the external loads), there will be a
discretization error in the finite element approximation. The approximate order of error in the displacement and the
strain and stress of a two-noded beam element are given by
Displacement Error Order = O(hp+1) = O(h4)
Strain (Curvature) / Stress (Bending Moment) Error Order = O(hp-m+1) = O(h2)
where h is the element size, p the order of the complete polynomial used in the displacement interpolation and m is
the order of the displacement derivative representing the strain. Note that the error is independent of the loading but
only occurs if the loading causes a variation which cannot be modeled perfectly by the displacement function. In
order to decrease the error, clearly we can employ h-refinement by reducing element size (i.e. increasing the
number of elements with the original DOFs still maintained) or employ p-refinement by increasing the order of the
complete polynomial. Based on the above orders of errors, it is apparent that finite element analysis is associated
with higher accuracy in predicting displacements than in predicting strains and stresses.
A 2-noded beam element describes in its displacement vector {y}, a 1st order complete polynomial
axial displacement = constant + x
variation in one variable x due to the two axial translational nodal DOFs. Its strain vector {ε} thus contains a
constant variation of axial strain (which is defined as the first derivative of the axial displacement with respect to x
along the element). Subsequently, the stress vector {σ} also contains a constant variation of axial force. Note that
the required displacement continuity between the finite elements is C1-1 = C0 since only the first derivative needs to
be defined. A two-noded beam can model concentrated external axial forces applied at its nodes exactly (do not
apply axial force within element) because the displacement variation will be linear and the axial strain will be
constant and the axial stress constant. The approximate order of error in the displacement and the strain and stress
of a two-noded bar element are given by
Strain (Axial Strain) / Stress (Axial Force) Error Order = O(hp-m+1) = O(h1)
A 2-noded beam element describes in its displacement vector {y}, a 1st order complete polynomial
torsional rotation = constant + x
variation in one variable x due to the two torsional rotation nodal DOFs. Its strain vector {ε} thus contains a
constant variation of torsional strain (which is defined as the first derivative of the torsional rotation with respect to
x along the element). Subsequently, the stress vector {σ} also contains a constant variation of torsional moment.
Note that the required displacement continuity between the finite elements is C1-1 = C0 since only the first derivative
of the displacement needs to be defined. A two-noded beam can model concentrated external torsional moments
applied at its nodes exactly (do not apply torsional moment within element) because the torsional rotation variation
will be linear and the torsional strain will be constant and the torsional moment constant.
The force-displacement relationship of the Timoshenko beam is shown. For the Euler-Bernoulli beam, β is zero.
 F1   12 6L − 12 6L   δ1 
M   6L (4 + β )L 2
− 6L (2 − β )L   θ1 
2 
 1 EI  12EI
 = 3   β=
 F2  L (1 + β )  − 12 − 6L 12 − 6 L  δ 2  GAL2
 
M 2   6L (2 − β) − 6L (4 + β )L2  θ 2 
899
Second Edition
6.3.2.2 Two Dimensional Shell Elements (In-Plane Plane Stress or Plane Strain Membrane Stiffness)
Shell elements have in general 5 DOFs in all their nodes. Hence, general shell elements have in-plane stiffnesses
(of either plain stress or plane strain) and also transverse bending, shear and torsional stiffnesses. Plate elements by
definition have only the transverse bending, shear and torsional stiffnesses. The definition of in-plane stiffnesses is
important when the shells map a curved geometry or when the geometry becomes curved as a result of
deformations in a nonlinear analysis. In these cases, the transverse loadings are resisted both by transverse bending
(and shear) stiffness and also by in-plane stiffnesses. In other words, the membrane and bending actions are
coupled in curved shells and when deflections are large in a nonlinear analysis.
Note that plane stress elements refer to thin (with respect to the other dimensions) shells such that transverse
stresses due to in-plane forces do not develop because the out-of-plane dimension is not constrained such as in plate
girder webs. Plane strain elements refer to thick (with respect to the other dimensions) shells such that transverse
strains due to in-plane forces do not develop because of the out-of-plane constraint such as the slice of a retaining
wall, a dam or a long pipe subjected to internal pressure. The mid-plane of the shell element lies exactly halfway
between the two faces. All in-plane loads act along the mid-plane and are symmetric with respect to the mid-plane.
All boundary conditions are also symmetric with respect to the mid-plane.
A 3-noded triangular shell element (known as a constant strain triangle CST) describes in its displacement vector
{y}, a 1st order complete polynomial
in−plane u = constant + x + y
in−plane v = constant + x + y
variation in two variables x, y due to the six (two in-plane displacements at the three nodes) nodal DOFs. Writing
the in-plane displacement in terms of shape functions (with natural coordinates) and also including the
isoparametric representation of the geometry (i.e. in terms of the shape functions),
Its strain vector {ε} thus contains a constant variation of two orthogonal normal strains and one shear strain (which
are defined as the first derivatives of the in-plane displacement with respect to x, y and xy respectively within the
element). Subsequently, the stress vector {σ} also contains a constant variation of two orthogonal normal stresses
and one shear stress. Because of the constant nature of the stresses, 4-noded or 8-noded quadrilaterals or 6-noded
triangles are thus recommended in general. Note that the required displacement continuity between the finite
elements is C0 since only the first derivative of the displacement needs to be defined. Thus the stress, which is the
first derivative of the displacement, will not be continuous between elements. A fine mesh will thus be necessary to
model large variations in stress. If the variation in the displacement function or the stress function is not able to
model the actual variation in reality (which is dependent upon the variation of the external loads), there will be a
discretization error in the finite element approximation. The approximate order of error in the displacement and the
strain and stress is given by
Strain / Stress Error Order = O(hp-m+1) = O(h1)
900
Second Edition
A 6-noded triangular (serendipity) shell element describes in its displacement vector {y}, a 2nd order complete
polynomial
in−plane u = constant + x + y + x2 + xy + y2
in−plane v = constant + x + y + x2 + xy + y2
variation in two variables x, y due to the six (two in-plane displacements at the six nodes) nodal DOFs. Writing the
in-plane displacement in terms of shape functions (with natural coordinates) and also including the isoparametric
representation of the geometry (i.e. in terms of the shape functions),
Its strain vector {ε} thus contains a linear variation of two orthogonal normal strains and one shear strain (which
are defined as the first derivatives of the in-plane displacement with respect to x, y and xy respectively within the
element). Subsequently, the stress vector {σ} also contains a linear variation of two orthogonal normal stresses and
one shear stress. Note that the required displacement continuity between the finite elements is C0 since only the first
derivative of the displacement needs to be defined. Thus the stress, which is the first derivative of the displacement,
will not be continuous between elements. A fine mesh will thus be necessary to model large variations in stress. If
the variation in the displacement function or the stress function is not able to model the actual variation in reality
(which is dependent upon the variation of the external loads), there will be a discretization error in the finite
element approximation. The approximate order of error in the displacement and the strain and stress is given by
Displacement Error Order = O(h2+1) = O(h3)
A 4-noded quadrilateral shell element describes in its displacement vector {y}, a 1st order complete polynomial
in−plane u = constant + x + y + xy
in−plane v = constant + x + y + xy
variation in two variables x, y due to the eight (two in-plane displacements at the four nodes) nodal DOFs. Writing
the in-plane displacement in terms of shape functions (with natural coordinates) and also including the
isoparametric representation of the geometry (i.e. in terms of the shape functions),
901
Second Edition
Its strain vector {ε} thus contains εx constant in x but linear in y, εy constant in y but linear in x and γxy linear in x
and y, the strains are defined as the first derivatives of the in-plane displacement with respect to x, y and xy
respectively within the element. Subsequently, the stress vector {σ} also contains σx constant in x but linear in y,
σy constant in y but linear in x and τxy linear in x and y. Note that the required displacement continuity between
the finite elements is C0 since only the first derivative of the displacement needs to be defined. Thus the stress,
which is the first derivative of the displacement, will not be continuous between elements. A fine mesh will thus be
necessary to model large variations in stress. The four-noded shell element is however much better then the three
noded shell as the variation of stress within the element is linear in some senses, i.e. although the variation of the
normal stress in x is constant in x, it is linear in y. If the variation in the displacement function or the stress function
is not able to model the actual variation in reality (which is dependent upon the variation of the external loads),
there will be a discretization error in the finite element approximation. The approximate order of error in the
displacement and the strain and stress is given by
An 8-noded quadrilateral (serendipity) shell element describes in its displacement vector {y}, a 2nd order complete
polynomial
in−plane u = constant + x + y + xy + x2 + xy + y2 + x3y
in−plane v = constant + x + y + xy + x2 + xy + y2 + xy3
variation in two variables x, y due to the eight (two in-plane displacements at the eight nodes) nodal DOFs. Its
strain vector {ε} thus contains εx linear in x but parabolic in y, εy linear in y but parabolic in x and γxy parabolic in x
and y, the strains are defined as the first derivatives of the in-plane displacement with respect to x, y and xy
respectively within the element. Subsequently, the stress vector {σ} also contains σx linear in x but parabolic in y,
σy linear in y but parabolic in x and τxy parabolic in x and y. Note that the required displacement continuity
between the finite elements is C0 since only the first derivative of the displacement needs to be defined. Thus the
stress, which is the first derivative of the displacement, will be continuous between elements. If the variation in the
displacement function or the stress function is not able to model the actual variation in reality (which is dependent
upon the variation of the external loads), there will be a discretization error in the finite element approximation.
The approximate order of error in the displacement and the strain and stress is given by
Displacement Error Order = O(h2+1) = O(h3)
902
Second Edition
6.3.2.3 Two Dimensional Shell Elements (Out of Plane Bending, Shear and Torsional Plate Stiffness) 19
The use of solid elements of model thin plates would be extremely expensive unless one of dimensions of the solid
is allowed to be very small in comparison to the other two. Thin solids however would be very badly conditioned.
Hence the development of plates and shells. By definition plates resist bending, membranes resist in-plane forces
and shells resist both bending and in-plane membrane actions.
Shell elements have in general 5 DOFs in all their nodes. Hence, general shell elements have in-plane stiffnesses
(of either plain stress or plane strain) and also transverse bending, shear and torsional stiffnesses. Plate elements by
definition have only the transverse bending, shear and torsional stiffnesses. The definition of in-plane stiffnesses is
important when the shells map a curved geometry or when the geometry becomes curved as a result of
deformations in a nonlinear analysis. In these cases, the transverse loadings (i.e. normal to the surface) are resisted
both by transverse bending (and shear) stiffness and also by in-plane stiffnesses, i.e. coupled membrane-bending
behavior. To reiterate, flat plates can behave as membranes with no bending strains or as bending elements with no
membrane action when the loading is in-plane or out-of-plane. This would be an incorrect representation of reality
in the two cases, namely when the deflections are large in a nonlinear analysis and when the initial undeflected
geometry is curved to start with. In these cases, the transverse and in-plane loadings are resisted by both bending
and membrane action, i.e. their stiffnesses are coupled. Note that membrane actions is far more efficient than
bending action. Resisting loading by bending is generally an inefficient method. For out-of-plane loading, it must
be remembered that shell models are used to model thin flat plate structures subjected to transverse loading in
reality. Possible mathematical models include: -
1. Membrane shell model: for extremely thin plates dominated by membrane effects, such as inflatable
structures and fabrics (parachutes, sails, etc).
2. Von-Karman model: for very thin bent plates in which membrane and bending effects interact strongly
on account of finite lateral deflections. Important model for post-buckling analysis.
3. Kirchhoff model: for thin bent plates with small deflections, negligible shear energy and uncoupled
membrane-bending action.
4. Reissner-Mindlin model: for thin and moderately thick bent plates in which first-order transverse shear
effects are considered. Particularly important in dynamics as well as honeycomb and composite wall
constructions.
5. High order composite models: for detailed (local) analysis of layered composites including inter-lamina
shear effects.
6. Exact models: for the analysis of additional effects using three-dimensional elasticity.
The first two models require geometrically nonlinear methods of analyses. The last four models are geometrically
linear in the sense that all governing equations are set up in the undeformed flat configuration. The last two models
are primarily used in detailed or local stress analysis near edges, point loads or openings. All models may
incorporate other types of nonlinearities due, for example, to material behavior, composite fracture, cracking or
delamination, as well as certain forms of boundary conditions. The Kirchhoff and Reissner-Mindlin plate models
are the most commonly used shells models in statics and vibrations, respectively.
The Kirchhoff model requires the thickness dimension h to be everywhere small, but not too small, compared to a
characteristic length L of the plate mid-surface. The term “small” is to be interpreted in the engineering sense and
not in the mathematical sense. For example, h/L is typically 1/5 to 1/100 for most plate structures. A paradox is that
an extremely thin plate, such as the fabric of a parachute or a hot air balloon, ceases to function as a thin plate! The
Kirchhoff model also assumes inextensional bending i.e. the plate does not experience appreciable stretching or
contractions of its mid-surface. This is simply known as plate bending. The Von-Karman model on the other hand
assumes extensional bending, i.e. the mid-surface experiences significant stretching or contraction. This is also
called coupled membrane-bending.
19
FELIPPA, Carlos A. Advanced Finite Element Methods. Center for Aerospace Structures, University of Colorado, 2001.
903
Second Edition
Note that analyzing plate bending as a series of beams bending in two orthogonal directions ignores the role of
twisting moment and also the Poisson contractions.
The Euler-Bernoulli beam and the Kirchhoff plate model both ignore transverse shear deformations (although the
shear force is of course still calculated). The assumptions of these models are that the planes normal to the mid-
surface remain plane and normal (orthogonal) to the deformed mid-surface. On both the Euler-Bernoulli beam and
the Kirchhoff plate, without shear deformation, the required displacement continuity between elements is C1. The
Kirchhoff plate uses one parameter to describe the displacement field, for a QUAD4 with 3 DOFs at each node
(two out-of-plane rotational and one transverse displacement),
w = constant + x + y + x2 + xy + y2 + x3 + y3 + x2y + xy2 + x3y + xy3
which is a complete 3rd order polynomial (incomplete 4th order). Curvature (and stress and moment) would thus be
linear like the Euler-Bernoulli beam. But this element is incompatible in normal slope. In fact, Kirchhoff elements
generally suffer from the inability to be fully C1 compatible. However, these incompatibilities reduce to zero with
mesh refinement and the elements can performs satisfactorily. Another failing of the Kirchhoff elements is that
they cannot be generalized to curved side configurations.
The Discrete Kirchhoff elements on the other hand use independent displacement and rotation interpolation fields
w, θx and θy much like the Mindlin approach which abandons the simple Kirchhoff bending theory altogether.
The Timoshenko beam hand includes shear deformation correction terms in its stiffness matrix. In an analogous
way, shear correction terms can be included in the Mindlin plate model to represent deeper plates. Here, planes
normal to the mid-surface remain plane and but not necessarily normal (orthogonal) to the deformed mid-surface.
On both the Timoshenko beam and the Mindlin plate, with shear deformation, the required displacement continuity
between elements is C0. Unlike the Kirchhoff plate element which uses just one parameter to describe the
displacement field, the Mindlin model uses uncoupled displacement and rotational fields w, θx and θy. Each node
still has 3 DOFs (two out-of-plane rotational and one transverse displacement). The curvature is no longer the
second derivative of the displacement field, instead the first derivative of the rotation field. Because the highest
derivative is only the first derivative, the continuity requirement is only C0. The Mindlin model also automatically
results in through-thickness transverse shear strains (unlike the Kirchhoff model which required equilibrium
considerations). The Mindlin model is superior to the Kirchhoff model if the plate is thick as the shear
deformations become important when the thickness of the plate is greater than about 1/10 of the plate width
in a physical sense, not mathematical sense of the element. This is because the Mindlin model represents the
shear deformation directly instead of having to infer it as the derivative of the bending moment, the latter of which
is more inaccurate. Modelling thin plates with Mindlin elements on the other hand lead to the susceptibility of shear
locking (a form of ill-conditioning as the shear strains become relatively insignificant). The condition can be
avoided by using reduced integration for the shear stiffness terms whilst the bending stiffness terms can still be
fully integrated to avoid spurious modes. Hence a QUAD8 would have a 3 x 3 Gauss rule for bending but only a 2
x 2 for shear. The Mindlin model can also be generalized to curved isoparametric formulations.
904
Second Edition
6.3.2.3.1 Kirchhoff Plate Element
Like beams, Kirchhoff plate elements are C1 plate elements because that is the continuity order nominally required
for the transverse displacement shape functions. The Kirchhoff model is applicable to elastic plates that satisfy the
following conditions.
(i) The plate is thin in the sense that the thickness h is small compared to the characteristic length(s), but
not so thin that the lateral deflection become comparable to h.
(ii) The plate thickness is either uniform or varies slowly so that 3-dimensional stress effects are ignored.
(iii) The plate is symmetric in fabrication about the mid-surface.
(iv) Applied transverse loads are distributed over plate surface areas of dimension h or greater.6
(v) The support conditions are such that no significant extension of the mid-surface develops.
The kinematics of a Bernoulli-Euler beam is based on the assumption that plane sections remain plane and normal
to the deformed longitudinal axis. The kinematics of the Kirchhoff plate is based on the extension of this
assumption to biaxial bending i.e. material normals to the original reference surface remain straight and normal to
the deformed reference surface. Material normals, also called material filaments, are directed along the normal to
the mid-surface (that is, in the element z direction) and extending h/2 above and h/2 below it. The magnitude h is
the plate thickness.
As shown on the diagram, the variation of the two orthogonal direct stresses and the one (bending or in-plane, as
opposed to transverse) shear stress over the thickness of the element is linear. These thus give rise to moments
when integrated.
905
Second Edition
The Kirchhoff model suffers from 2 inconsistencies. Firstly, the transverse shear strains are zero. If the plate is
isotropic and follows Hooke’s law, this implies σxz = σyz = 0 and consequently there are no transverse shear forces.
But these forces appear necessarily from the equilibrium equations. Secondly, εzz = 0 says that the plate is in plane
strain whereas for plane stress σzz = 0 is a closer approximation to the physics. For a homogeneous isotropic plate,
plane strain and plane stress coalesce if and only if Poisson’s ratio is zero. Both inconsistencies are similar to those
encountered in the Bernoulli-Euler beam model.
As in the case of Bernoulli-Euler beams, predictions of the transverse shear stresses must come entirely from
equilibrium analysis. The Kirchhoff plate model ignores the transverse shear energy, and in fact predicts σxz = σyz =
0 from the kinematic equations. In practical terms this means that the transverse shear stresses should be
significantly smaller than the bending stresses. If they are not, the Kirchhoff model does not apply, nor does the
Bernoulli-Euler beam for that matter. From equilibrium conditions, the transverse shear stresses and hence
transverse shear forces can be derived.
As indicated on the diagram, the variation of the two transverse shear stresses over the thickness of the element
from equilibrium conditions is parabolic, peaking at the neutral axis. These thus give rise to transverse shear forces
when integrated.
The only term not calculated for plates is the σzz, and hence the Fzz.
906
Second Edition
6.3.2.4 Three Dimensional Solid Elements
907
Second Edition
6.3.3 Finite Element Modelling For Static Analyses
6.3.3.1 Choice of Finite Element to Model the Load Path and Deformation
The choice of the finite element whether beams, shells or solids depend on the stiffness (which in turn depends on
the geometry) that we are trying to model in reality. Bending deformations govern in beams with span to depth
(S/D) ratios greater than 10 and of course finite element beams with shear deformations can be used to analyze
and design. When S/D less than 10, shear deformations should be included as well, and finite element beams with
shear deformations can be used to analyze and design. The inclusion of shear deformations will correctly decrease
the stiffness of the element. For S/D less than 2.5 it becomes a deep beam and thus finite element beams may be
used to analyze but deep beam design must be employed. When S/D is less than 1 the section is not a beam, i.e.
flexural deformations (and shear deformations do not occur and the load path is much more direct; note that
flexural stiffness is much smaller than axial stiffness). This occurs in shear walls where the load path is such that
the wall arches instead of bending like a beam. Shear walls should thus be modeled using vertically orientated
shells or even simply plane stress membranes when there are no out-of-plane forces. Another example of an S/D
less than 1 section is the capping beam of contiguous piles, used for foundations. It is inappropriate to model the
capping beam as finite element beams between piles with a very small spacing in between such that they are
effectively continuous (hence the name contiguous piles). Solid elements are really the only practical option.
Alternatively, if explicit modelling is not required, but simply a good representation of the capping beam stiffness,
the section can be made rigid as it does not behave like a beam. This is akin to modelling sections that are far more
rigid than adjacent sections as rigid for a global representation, and only then performing a local analysis on the
section explicitly modeled if required. The design of the capping beam can then be based on a strut and tie model.
Flat thin plates such as flat slabs can be modeled using a mesh of 2D shells (shells encompass both bending plates
and in-plane membrane plane stress elements) or simplistically as a grillage of 1D beam elements, which
effectively constrains the load paths. Ribbed slabs are best modeled with a combination of shells and beam
elements. I-beams, tubes and cylinders can be modeled explicitly using plane stress shell elements. Complicated
geometries that do not act like simple beams or thin shells must be modeled with solids.
6.3.3.2 Concepts of Stiffness
Concepts of stiffness are crucial in linear static analyses. It is worth noting that the equivalent stiffness of springs in
parallel is the addition of the individual stiffnesses and the equivalent stiffness of springs in series is the inverse of
the addition of the inverse of the individual stiffnesses. Stiffness in series occurs when the load path has to travel
both stiffnesses sequentially. Stiffness in parallel occurs when the load path is given the option to be more
attracted to the stiffer element. In series, there is no question of whether the load will travel the path or not, for it
must, all loads must travel some path, and in series, there is no other option. Hence, elements of different stiffness
in series will all experience the same load effects. In a statically indeterminate system, the elements with a greater
stiffness in a particular DOF (with other elements attached to the same DOF, hence in parallel) will attract more
force, because they are more resistant to deformation. The parallel members with smaller relative stiffness
contribution will conversely attract less force. However, all the load that is applied must eventually be balanced by
the reactions at the supports, i.e. all the applied load must be resisted in line the principle of conservation of energy.
The statically indeterminate system simply distributes this applied loading according to its distribution of stiffness,
eventually to its supports. Let us reiterate that in a linear static analysis, all the applied forces must be balanced by
the reactions. Deviations of the sum of the applied loads and the reactions from zero are an indication of ill
conditioning. These deviations also occur when there is a loss of internal strain energy. This happens when there is
artificial rotational stiffness applied onto the rotational DOFs on 2D shells that do not have their own in-plane
rotational stiffness in order that the originally singular equations may be solved. There is thus obviously a loss of
accuracy as some of the applied loads are not resisted by the structure but lost into the artificial constraints.
908
Second Edition
6.3.4 Finite Element Modelling For Dynamic Analyses
Modelling for dynamic analyses involves additional considerations on top of those for static analyses.
6.3.4.1 Mass and Stiffness Distribution
A static mesh is usually refined as locations of high stress concentration. A dynamic mesh is often more uniform as
the consideration of not only the location of the loading and inherent geometry that cause stress concentrations (as
with static analysis), but also the time variation of the loading and the nature of the response of a dynamic analysis
where higher modes cause local stress concentrations which are not observed in a static analysis.
As a minimum requirement, the lower modes of the structure must have the correct resonant frequencies and mode
shapes. The lowest modes of vibration generally involve mode shapes that minimize the strain energy and
maximize the kinetic energy. Imagine the natural bending modes of a simply-supported beam. The higher the
bending mode, the more the strain energy in the system for a maximum amplitude of displacement. Also, the higher
the bending mode, the less the kinetic energy in the system as more points within the beam are stationary. Uniform
distributions of mass and stiffness require a uniform mesh. Since minimizing the strain energy requires a detailed
description of the stiffness distribution, the stiffness matrix must be as accurate as possible. Generally, a dynamic
analysis can have a coarser mesh than a static analysis because the response tends to be controlled by the low
frequency behavior, usually much less than 10% of the total number of possible modes is necessary. Areas of low
stiffness must be accurately modeled, as these are the areas where deformation is largest and since the stiffness is
low, the strain energy will be minimized. Note also that since deformations are high, the kinetic energy will be
high, thus giving the two conditions required to simulate low frequency modes accurately. On the other hand, a
coarse mass distribution with lumped masses (instead of the more expensive banded kinematically equivalent
coupled mass matrix) is generally sufficient as maximizing the kinetic energy is much easier to achieve. More care
must be taken with mass description if the higher modes of vibration are required, where coupled mass
formulations may be more accurate. Large masses must be correctly positioned in the model. In order to
simulate lower modes accurately, to maximize the kinetic energy, the nodes should be positioned where the mass is
large.
If only the first few resonance frequencies and mode shapes are required, then a relatively coarse mesh can be used.
If higher frequencies are required, then the mesh must be suitably fine to model the more complicated mode shapes.
A good parameter may be the modal mass. We know that the modal mass of all the bending modes of a beam is
half the beam mass if simply supported and quarter the beam mass if a cantilever. When higher modes deviate from
the modal mass value, then we know that the mode shape cannot be captured by the mesh. With more complicated
structures, an h- or p-refinement should be performed and the modal masses of the original and the refined mesh
should be compared; modal masses of higher modes which begin to show discrepancies indicates the extent of the
capability of the mesh in capturing these higher modes.
Modal eigenvector displacement and frequencies response does not require a very fine mesh. If a dynamic stress
analysis is to be performed, then the mesh must be comparably fine to that for a static stress analysis. Acceleration
response requires a finer mesh than displacement response, as good accuracy of higher modes is required.
6.3.4.2 Nonstructural Mass
The dynamic mass often includes the medium surrounding the structure. For instance, in the analysis of offshore
gravity platforms, some degree of the mass of the water surrounding the shafts must be included within the mass.
Noting that the mass acts in 3 translational orthogonal directions (likewise inertia acts about 3 orthogonal axes), it
is essential that the correct component be modeled. The added mass on the shafts is a horizontal mass component
whilst the added mass on the base of the gravity base structure is a vertical mass component. The inclusion of
added masses on the dynamic model also means that a uniform global acceleration applied to all parts of the
structure to model gravitational force cannot be employed, as the added mass will incorrectly increase the weight of
909
Second Edition
the structure. Instead, the gravitational force must be modeled using explicit nodal loads or more accurately,
gravitational accelerations applied to a set of masses that excludes the added masses.
Another important consideration when modelling non-structural mass is that if rigid links are used to model the
center of gravity of the non-structural mass from the structure, then a coupled mass formulation (kinematically
equivalent mass matrix) must be used. This is because if lumped mass formulation is used, the rigid links simply
will transfer the non-structural mass onto the structure, and hence effectively not incorporating the offset. This will
cause significant errors in the lowest frequencies. The offset mass increases the rotational inertia and this has the
effect of reducing some of the natural frequencies and hence potentially increasing the response.
910
Second Edition
6.3.5 Modelling Mechanisms With Inertia Relief – Modelling Displacement Effects Due to Applied Loads
On Systems in Conditionally Stable Equilibrium
Inertia relief is used to model mechanisms and unconstrained structures in static solutions. The structure is assumed
to be in a steady-state condition, i.e. no transient dynamic effects. The displacements obtained will be relative to a
moving frame of reference. The inertia (mass) of the structure is used to resist the applied loadings, that is, an
assumption is made that the structure is in a state of static equilibrium (steady-state) even though it is not
constrained. Examples include a spacecraft in orbit, an aircraft in flight or an automobile on a test track. The
method is used to find out what happens to these structures relative to their moving frame of reference (due to their
steady-state condition) when an additional excitation is applied.
There are two ways to invoke the inertia relief. The first method is to specify the SUPORT entry explicitly by
including “PARAM, INREL, -1” in the Bulk Data Section. The second method (the recommended method) is to let
MSC.NASTRAN select the SUPORT degrees of freedom automatically by including “PARAM, INREL, -2” in the
Bulk Data Section. Either way, all 6 possible rigid body motions must be constrained by SUPORT. An optional
“PARAM, GRDPNT, x”—where x is a grid point ID—can be specified in the model. If “PARAM, GRDPNT, x” is
used, the loads and accelerations will be summed about this point. If “PARAM, GRDPNT, x” is not specified, then
the loads and accelerations will be summed about the origin of the basic coordinate system.
When inertia relief is specified, MSC.NASTRAN calculates the forces that result from a rigid body acceleration
about the point specified on the “PARAM, GRDPNT, x” in the specified directions. MSC.NASTRAN then
calculates the summation of all applied loadings in the same directions. Accelerations are applied to the structure in
the appropriate directions to “balance” the applied loadings. The structure is now in a state of static equilibrium,
i.e., the summation of all applied loads is 0.0. Since the problem is not constrained, rigid body displacement is still
possible. The next step performed by MSC. NASTRAN is to constrain the SUPORT degrees of freedom to a
displacement of 0.0 and provide the relative motion of all other grid points with respect to that reference point.
Hence, the term “reference” degree of freedom is used to describe the SUPORT degrees of freedom in MSC.
NASTRAN. The set of degrees of freedom described on the SUPORT entry belong to the r-set or reference set for
the solution. The computed solution is the correct one, and it is relative to any rigid body motion that is occurring.
To perform manual inertia relief, the following is undertaken.

PARAM, INREL, -1
$ BULK DATA
SUPORT GID1 C1 GID2 C2 GID3 C3 GID4 C4
The inertia relief method requires that a realistic mass distribution exists, and the degrees of freedom listed on the
SUPORT entry must be connected elastically to the model in all specified 6 degrees of freedom. (For example,
degrees of freedom 4, 5, and 6 on a grid point with only solid elements attached cannot be used since solid
elements have no stiffness in these degrees of freedom). It is good practice (but not required by MSC.NASTRAN)
to use the same grid point on PARAM, GRDPNT and on the SUPORT entry.
An additional feature allowed in Solution 101 is the solution of a problem under uniform acceleration. This
problem is posed using the DMIG, UACCEL Bulk Data entry in addition to the previously mentioned
requirements. In this case, uniform accelerations are applied to the model, and the solution is found. Uniform
accelerations are useful for situations, such as spacecraft liftoff and landing loadings, which are often specified as
static accelerations.
911
Second Edition
The OLOAD output will present the applied loads and also 6 sections for the loads necessary to impose unit
accelerations in the 6 DOFs about the support point.
Whenever a SUPORT entry is used in static analysis, the epsilon and strain energy printed in the table from UIM
3035 should be checked. The values printed for epsilon and strain energy in the UIM 3035 table should all be
numeric zero. The strain energy printed in this table for matrix KLR represents the strain energy in the model when
the one SUPORT degree of freedom is moved 1.0 unit, while all other SUPORT degrees of freedom are
constrained. If the SUPORT degrees of freedom are properly specified, the model should be capable of rigid body
motion (strain-free) with no strain energy. The values printed for the strain energy indicate the ability of the model
to move as a rigid body. These values should always be checked. If the structure is not constrained, the values
should be numeric zero, but roundoff almost always results in a small nonzero value. Acceptable values are a
function of the units, size of the structure, and precision of the hardware.
The element forces and stresses will be zero since it is motion without strain that we are modelling. Hence the SPC
forces corresponding to the SUPORT freedoms will also be zero. The displacements of the structure of course will
not be zero except at the SUPORT location, hence the displacements are relative to the SUPORT.
Note that the elements used in inertia relief must have mass and inertia. Hence CBAR elements may be unreliable
at times (when they are collinear), thus it is recommended that CBEAMs used instead.
In manual inertia relief, when the r-set is chosen such that structure is not constrained in a statically determinate
manner, or if the stiffness attached to these points is inadequate, the rigid body mode shapes may be poor, leading
to low accuracy in inertial load calculations. A poor static analysis solution may also result from the poor
constraints, independent of the loading problems. Both effects may result in poor overall accuracy. Poor results can
occur with little warning when the SUPORT entry is misused. To perform automatic inertia relief, the following is
undertaken.

PARAM, INREL, -2
The specification of a SUPORT entry is no longer required. The reference frame is selected automatically, in a
manner that poor solutions are unlikely because of the choice of reference frame variables. The DMIG, UACCEL
cannot be used with automatic inertia relief.
912
Second Edition
6.3.6 Submodelling Techniques for Static Analysis 20
Submodelling refers to refined analysis of a local area after a global analysis is carried out. This clearly eliminates
the need for a refined global mesh or a complicated transition to a refined mesh whilst saving computational effort.
Substructuring on the other hand, refers to a procedure that condenses a group of finite elements into one element
called a superelement. The computational effort for is greatly reduced if the superelement is used within a
structure instead of all the individual elements.
Submodelling can (and should) be performed using substructuring techniques such as static condensation using
superelements (for the remaining parts of the structure), but, in practice, other alternative techniques are used for
linear static analysis. These alternatives are boundary internal forces and boundary enforced displacements
techniques. When local analysis is to be performed in a zone of a structure that probably is going to be modified
(thickness increments, local reinforcements, etc) from local analysis results (stresses, displacements), the best
approach to set appropriate boundary conditions is using the substructuring technique of static condensation with
MSC.NASTRAN superelements for the remaining parts of the structure. This technique will give exact results.
Boundary internal forces and enforced displacements methods will be inappropriate, specially, when large stiffness
modifications are foreseen in local model, or when local fine model stiffness is substantially different from the
stiffness of local zone modelling used in the complete model.
To reiterate, the substructuring technique using superelements is exact for local modelling. That is to say, the rest
of the structure is reduced to superelements, whilst local mesh and design changes are performed on a local part.
These local analyses may refer to local stress analysis, local redesign iterations, local buckling analysis and local
non-linearity analysis. Submodelling by substructuring using superelements is also mandatory when different
components of a whole model strategically and confidentially shared between several companies (i.e.
aircrafts, engines and space structures).
6.3.6.1 Submodelling by Substructuring – Static Condensation (Guyan Reduction) using Superelements
Very often, in a complicated structure, some sort of manual substructuring is required. Different parts of the
structure will be analyzed separately. All the applied loads must eventually find their way to the constraints. For
instance, in large structural engineering projects where a multiple story building structure is to be analyzed, the
higher stories may be analyzed separately from that below. The higher story may incorporate a shear wall as a
structural load-resisting element being rested upon say a beam in the story below. It will be incorrect to restrain
rigidly all the supports of the higher story, i.e. the base of the shear wall must not be all supported on rigid supports
(with the intention of applying the reaction forces onto the beam of the story below in the opposite direction). If
this was done, the shear wall would not arch, but all the load would simply transfer straight down into the rigid
supports. Hence, instead, the relative support stiffness under the shear wall must be incorporated, by say modelling
the beam as well. The shear wall will then arch and the load distribution will be far more realistic with more of the
load transferring directly to the supports of the shear wall. The reactions on these flexible supports (here the forces
on the beam and the ends of the shear wall) can then be transferred onto the model containing the story below. If on
the other hand, had all the load-resisting elements been columns supported on equal stiffness foundations, the
supports of the upper story could well have been rigid and the reaction applied onto the story below. To model the
boundaries of the local model with appropriate stiffness is substructuring. Here we have performed manual
substructuring as the stiffness of the remaining part of the structure was approximated manually. To sum up, when
manual substructuring is undertaken, the supports of a substructure should be modeled to incorporate their relative
stiffness such as to obtain the correct distribution of reactions, which in turn will be applied (of course in the
opposite direction – Newton’s Third Law) onto the model containing the adjacent substructure. This of course is an
approximate procedure as the substructuring is performed manually. Automatic substructuring using superelements
to provide the stiffness at the boundaries of the local model is on the other hand exact.
20
MATINEZ, Angel. Submodelling Techniques for Static Analysis. MSC. Software First South European Technology
Conference, 7-9 June 2000.
913
Second Edition
Modelling the stiffness of the adjacent (to the substructure) elements is fundamental to substructure
analysis. The static condensation technique does just that by reducing the equations to only involve the
DOFs of the substructure and its interface, but in doing so incorporates the stiffness and internal forces of
the remaining part of the whole model onto the interface DOFs. The most important characteristic of static
condensation is that the boundary conditions at the interface of the substructure depends only on the
stiffness and the loading of the remaining part of the whole model and is totally independent of the stiffness
and loading of the submodel. Hence any modifications to the loading and stiffness of the submodel are
perfectly acceptable and the answers will be exact. Thus, for static analysis, the static condensation
technique produces the exact same results as that obtained from the full analysis.
Consider a finite element model of a structure that has been properly constrained and loaded. Total number of
d.o.f.’s is denoted as g, normally equal to 6x(number of nodes). This g set can be subdivided in c (constrained) and
f (free). Fs
Fm
c
g m
f
s
m
After applying constraint conditions, static analysis equations become in matrix form as follows:
[K ff ] ⋅ {δ f } = {Ff } (1)
Free (f) d.o.f.’s are going to be subdivided in two sets: m (masters) and s (slaves). Masters d.o.f.’s are the ones to
be kept in the reduction process, and slave set will be reduced. This partition gives expression (1) the following
form:
K mm K ms  δ m  Fm 
K ⋅  =   (2)
 sm K ss   δ s   Fs 
that results in these two equations:

[K mm ] ⋅ {δ m } + [K ms ] ⋅ {δs } = {Fm }
(3)
[K sm ] ⋅ {δ m } + [K ss ] ⋅ {δs } = {Fs }
Solving {δ s }from second equation of (3) gives:
{δ s } = [K ss ]−1 ({Fs } − [K sm ] ⋅ {δ m }) (4)
This expression can be used for the recovery calculation of {δ s }, when {δ m } were known. Considering last
expression (4) in first equation of (3), and reordering terms, the following system of equations is obtained:
( )
[K mm ] − [K ms ][K ss ]−1 [K sm ] ⋅ {δ m } = {Fm } − [K ms ][K ss ]−1 {Fs } (5)
that can be expressed in the compact form:
[K ]⋅ {δ
*s
mm m } = {Fm*s } (6)
being:
914
Second Edition
[K ] = [K ] − [K ][K ] [K
*s
mm mm ms ss
−1
sm ]
{F }= {F } − [K ][K ] {F }
*s −1
(7)
m m ms ss s
[K ] is named reduced stiffness matrix and {F } the reduced load vector. Equation (6) represents the reduced
*s
mm
*s
m
equations system to master d.o.f.’s set (m). Solving this system, displacements {δ m } at masters are obtained.
Expression (4) can be used then, to obtain displacements at slave d.o.f.’s (s).
Static condensation applied to linear static analysis gives an exact solution, equal to the solution of the global
equation system (2). Consider a finite element model of a structure that is subdivided in two parts or substructures
A and B. Finite element model can be subdivided in the following d.o.f.’s sets:
• a: internal d.o.f.’s of substructure A.
• b: internal d.o.f.’s of substructure B.
• i: interface d.o.f.’s between substructures A and B.
Fa Fa
a a A
Fi Fi
i i
b i
Fb
B
Fb b
Stiffness matrices of each substructure take the form:

K K ai   K iiB K ib 
K A =  aa A  K B =   (8)
 K ia K ii  K bi K bb 
Assembling the stiffness matrices of each substructure results in the global system of equations for static analysis
of the whole structure:
K aa K ai 0  δ a  Fa 
K     
 ia K ii K ib  ⋅  δi  =  Fi  (9)
  
 0 K bi K bb  δ b  Fb  
being: K ii = K iiA + K iiB (10)
Static reduction is going to be applied to set (b) as slave d.o.f.’s and (a+i) as masters. Stiffness matrix and load
vector are partitioned in the following way:
K aa K ai 0   Fa 
K K K ms     Fm 
K ii K ib  =  mm  Fi  =   (11)
 ia K ss 
 F   Fs 
K
 0 K bi K bb   sm
 b
Recovering the expressions (7) for the calculation of reduced stiffness matrix and reduced load vector:
[K ] = [K ] − [K ][K ] [K
*s
mm mm ms ss
−1
sm ]
{F } = {F } − [K ][K ] {F }
*s
m m ms ss
−1
s
Applying these equations from established partitions in (11):
915
Second Edition
[K ] = KK
*b
( a +i )
K ai   0 
aa
K  − K  [K bb ] [0 K bi ]
−1
 ia ii   ib 
(12)
{F(*ab+i ) }    
F 0
=  a  −   [K bb ] {Fb }
F K
−1
 i   ib 
that result in:
[K ] = KK
*b
( a +i )
aa K ai 
K ii − K ib ⋅ K −bb1 ⋅ K bi 
 ia
(13)
{F(*ab+i ) } 
=
Fa
−1


Fi − K ib ⋅ K bb ⋅ Fb 
Decomposing each matrix as sum of two terms:
[K ] = KK
*b
( a +i )
K ai  0
A + 
aa 0
−1

 = K A + K *iib
 ia K ii  0 K ii − K ib ⋅ K bb ⋅ K bi 
B
(14)
{ }
Fa  
F( a +i ) =   + 
*b 0
−1
 Fa 
 =   + Fi
*b
 0  Fi − K ib ⋅ K bb ⋅ Fb   0 
The reduced equations systems to d.o.f.’s set (a+i) has the following form:
(K A )
δ  F 
+ K *iib ⋅  a  =  a  + Fi*b
δi   0 
(15)
[K ]⋅ δδ  = {F }
*b
( a +i )
a *b
( a +i ) (16)
 i
Reduced stiffness matrix is composed of the stiffness matrix of substructure A and the reduced stiffness matrix of
substructure B to the interface d.o.f. (set i) expanded (completed with zeros) to (a+i) size. In the same way, reduced
load vector is the applied load to internal d.o.f.’s of substructure A (set a) plus the reduced load vector of
substructure B to set i, and expanded, again, to (a+i) size. In other words, to perform a local static analysis of
substructure A by static condensation technique, the following items are needed:
• Finite element model of substructure A.
• The effect of substructure B over A at interface d.o.f.’s:
• Reduced stiffness matrix of substructure B to interface d.o.f.’s (set i), and
• Reduced load vector of substructure B to interface d.o.f.’s (set i)
The most important characteristic of
Fa submodelling analysis by
substructuring using static
a A
condensation is that the boundary
conditions at the interface (reduced
model of substructure B) only
depends on the stiffness of
i
substructure B, and is totally
independent of the stiffness of
[K ] = [K ] − [K ][K ] [K
substructure A. Then, any
*b
ii
B
ii ib bb
−1
bi ] modification of substructure A will
{F }= {F } − [K ][K ] {F }
be treated correctly, and the results
*b −1
i i ib bb b
will be the same than the ones
obtained with the complete model.
Static Condensation Submodelling Method for Substructure
A
916
Second Edition
Let us discuss in terms of a-sets and o-sets. Displacement vector sets in NASTRAN define the equations of motion
and are partitioned in the following ways.
(i) g-set is the unconstrained set of structural equations
(ii) the g-set is partitioned into the m-set pertaining to the dependent set of DOFs and the n-set pertaining to
the independent set of DOFs
g-set − m-set = n-set
(iii) the n-set is then partitioned into s-set pertaining to the constrained DOFs and the f-set pertaining to the
unconstrained DOFs
n-set − s-set = f-set
(iv) the f-set is partitioned into the o-set pertaining to the DOFs eliminated by static condensation and the
a-set pertaining to the a-set (analysis set) pertaining to the DOFs not eliminated by static condensation
f-set − o-set = a-set
In the static condensation process you select a set of dynamic DOFs called the a-set; these are the retained DOFs
that form the analysis set. The complementary set is called the o-set and is the set of DOFs that are omitted from
the dynamic analysis through a reduction process. The process distributes the o-set mass, stiffness, and damping to
the a-set DOFs by using a transformation that is based on a partition of the stiffness matrix (hence the term static
condensation). This reduction process is exact only for static analysis, but leads to approximations in the
dynamic response. The a-set DOFs are defined by the ASET or ASET1 Bulk Data entries, and the o-set DOFs are
defined by the OMIT or OMIT1 Bulk Data entries.
If you start with the stiffness equation in terms of the set of the unconstrained (free) structural coordinates, you
have
Partitioning the free degrees of freedom into two subsets of the f-set, you obtain
Rewriting
On expansion of top equation
On expansion of bottom equation
First, the f-set is reduced to the a-set using Guyan reduction. Second, the analysis set {ua} is solved for. Third, the
omitted set {uo} is solved for. In static analysis, the results using static condensation are numerically exact. The
partitioned solution merely changes the order of the operations of the unpartitioned solution. Guyan reduction has
special applications in dynamic analysis. In dynamic analysis, the reduction is approximate; the term {uOO} is
ignored in this case. The reduction is based solely on static transformation BUT is EXACT provided that no loads
are applied to the o-set degrees of freedom.
917
Second Edition
To utilize static condensation, you can choose either the ASET/ASET1 or the OMIT/OMIT1 entries. With these
entries you should specify only the a-set (with ASET/ASET1 entries) or o-set (with OMIT/OMIT1 entries) degrees
of freedom. The unspecified remaining f-set DOFs are automatically placed in the complementary set. However, if
you specify both the a-set and o-set DOFs, then the unspecified remaining f-set DOFs are automatically placed in
the o-set. The same DOF cannot be specified on both the a-set and o-set; otherwise, the job fails with UFM 2101A.
Since the reduction process is performed on an individual degree of freedom, it is possible to have some of the
degrees of freedom at a grid point in the a-set and other degrees of freedom at a grid point in one of the other
mutually exclusive sets. No additional user input is required.
$ BULK DATA
ASET G1 C1 G2 C2 G3 C3 G4 C4
ASET1 C G1 G2 G3 G4 G5 G6 G7
G8 G9 G10 G11 …etc…
ASET1 C G1 THRU Gi
$ BULK DATA
OMIT G1 C1 G2 C2 G3 C3 G4 C4
OMIT1 C G1 G2 G3 G4 G5 G6 G7
G8 G9 G10 G11 …etc…
OMIT1 C G1 THRU Gi
The choice of whether to use the ASET/ASET1 or OMIT/OMIT1 is really a matter of convenience.
918
Second Edition
6.3.6.2 Submodelling – Boundary Internal Force Method
Other way to perform local analysis of substructure A is isolating it and considering internal loads from
substructure B to A, as applied loads at interface (set i). Equations system that reflects this approach can be derived
reordering terms in expression (15):
K aa K ai  δ a  Fa   0 
A⋅ = +
K
 ia
B
( −1
) −1
K ii   δ i   Fi  − K ii − K ib ⋅ K bb ⋅ K bi ⋅ δ i − K ib ⋅ K bb

⋅ Fb 
(17)
K aa K ai  δ a  Fa 
K ⋅ = + F
 ia K iiA   δ i   Fi  BA
FBA being the internal loads from substructure B to substructure A. These internal loads are the sum of two terms:
• ′ : Action forces over interface when substructure B is constrained (with zero displacement) at interface
FBA
d.o.f.’s and loaded with its applied load Fb:
 K iiB ′ 
K ib   0  − FBA
 ⋅ = 
K bi K bb  δ′b   Fb 
δ′b = K −bb1 ⋅ Fb (18)
′ = − K ib ⋅ K −bb1 ⋅ Fb
FBA
• ′′ : Action forces over interface when substructure B is enforced at interface with prescribed displacements
FBA
δi:  K iiB K ib   δi  − FBA ′′ 
  ⋅  ′′  =  
K bi K bb  δ b   0 
δ′b′ = −K −bb1 ⋅ K bi ⋅ δi (19)
′′ = −(K iiB − K ib ⋅ K −bb1 ⋅ K bi ) ⋅ δi
FBA
This term is dependent on displacements at interface d.o.f.’s (set i), and, indirectly, dependent on stiffness changes
of substructure A. This means that any stiffness modification in substructure A will imply a perturbation of
displacements δi, and then, changes in internal forces FBA. This lead to an important conclusion: there is an inherent
inaccuracy in local analysis of substructure A, using internal forces method when stiffness changes are performed
in this substructure A.
′ + FBA
As can be seen, it is demonstrated that FBA = FBA ′′ (20)
In this internal forces approach, it is possible that substructure A has not sufficient constraint conditions to avoid
rigid body motions or local mechanism problems. In this case, additional constraints are needed to remove these
singularities from stiffness matrix, but their reactions should be equal to zero. In the case that substructure A has
no external constraints, an isostatic (statically determinate) set of constraints should be applied. Reactions at these
constraints will be zero (or close to zero if the geometry is accurate and there are no significant Poisson effects
along the constrained boundary in 2D and 3D models) because FBA, Fa and Fi loads should be in static equilibrium.
Fa
a A
Internal forces at interface Internal Forces

( )
FBA = − K iiB − K ib ⋅ K −bb1 ⋅ K bi ⋅ δ i − K ib ⋅ K −bb1 ⋅ Fb Submodelling Method for
Substructure A
919
Second Edition
Consider the following pinned base portal frame to submodel. The whole model BMD, SFD and AFD is presented.
To submodel half the frame and produce the same internal effects, we need to apply the GPFORCE (in opposite
direction) at the interfaces and ensure by applying constraints that the submodel is statically determinate.
Encastre
The reactions at the artificial encastre support will be found to be ALL ZERO because the free-body is in static
equilibrium from the applied forces. Even if the chosen encastre node been the base i.e. the interface, the correct
effects will be obtained. The moment reaction at the base will be found to be ZERO as the translational restraints
in X and Z equilibrate the applied forces. This method is of course accurate here since the stiffness of the local
model has not been altered. If the local model stiffness had been altered, the boundary force method will be
inexact. From a practical viewpoint, this is because the stiffness change causes forces to distribute
differently. For instance, if the local model stiffness is reduced dramatically, more of the force will distribute
to stiffer parts of the structure and carried into the ground. A special case occurs when the remaining part of
the structure is isostatically mounted upon the local model (here if the portal frame was a cantilever), in
which case changes in stiffness of the local model will still produce exact results as that of the global model.
920
Second Edition
Encastre
In order to obtain the forces acting upon an element (be it a beam, shell or solid), the (global coordinate) grid
point forces on the grid for the relevant element is used. Do not confuse grid point stresses with grid point forces.
They differ totally in concept. Grid point stresses are the average (global coordinate) stress values at a grid due to
element stresses in the (shell and solid) elements adjacent to the grid. Hence, direct (say positive tensile) global
coordinate stresses in X in adjacent elements will be averaged to yield a positive tensile global stress at the grid
point. The grid stress can be thought of in the same way as the element stress, in the sense that that is the element
(global coordinate) stress at that location had there been an element there at the grid. Grid point forces on the other
hand are not average forces from adjacent elements. The grid point force balance provides insight into how the
loads at a grid are distributed amongst its adjoining elements i.e. it provides information of the load path. The
specification of a grid point forces must always be associated with an element (or applied load or reaction). Grid
point forces are the global coordinate force acting on a grid due to an adjacent (beam, shell or solid) element. It is
NOT THE FORCE ACTING ON THE ELEMENT, BUT ON THE GRID. If all the elements attached to a grid
are considered, then the grid point force should theoretically be zero for equilibrium at the grid connection, hence
the grid point force balance. Grid point force balance is computed only from linear stiffness elements, the sum of
applied loads and thermal loads, and SPC forces. Since GPFORCE is the force acting on the grid (or the structural
joint between adjacent elements), it is opposite to the direction of the force acting on the element. Hence, the
direction of the GPFORCE from the applied load is the same as the direction of load application, the direction of
the GPFORCE from the SPC reaction is the same as the direction of the reaction and the direction of the
GPFORCE from an element is opposite the force that acts upon the element.
GPFORCE Element in Tension GPFORCE
Effects NOT accounted for include those from mass elements in dynamic analysis (inertia loads), rigid elements
and MPCs (MPCFORCES), general elements, DMIG entries, and boundary loads from upstream superelements.
These effects may lead to an apparent lack of equilibrium at the grid point level. The global coordinate grid point
forces for each relevant entity (be they beams, shells, solids, applied loads or SPCs) acting on the grid at each
grid is obtained from GPFORCE (PRINT) as follows.
921
Second Edition
6.3.6.3 Submodelling – Boundary Internal Force Method of Substructure Isostatically Mounted Over Rest
of Structure
Suppose a structure composed of two substructures: A and B; substructure B is isostatically mounted over
substructure A and has not any external constraints. That is, interface set is a congruent set of six d.o.f.’s that
removes rigid body motions of substructure B.
Fb B
b
Fi
i
Internal Forces
a Submodelling Method for
Fa A Substructure A
Interface forces FBA can be obtained directly from static equilibrium equations and do not depend on stiffness of
substructure A or B.
In this case, static analysis of substructure B can be performed simply considering constrained to zero its six
interface d.o.f.’s:
 K iiB K ib   0  − FBA 
 ⋅ =  (23)
K bi K bb  δ b   Fb 
FBA = − K ib ⋅ K −bb1 ⋅ Fb = ϕib ⋅ Fb (24)

Internal forces (actions over interface) FBA are independent on substructure B stiffness: ϕib matrix is the rigid body
modes matrix.
This rigid body matrix can be obtained by means of a set of six enforcing displacements conditions that in matrix
form corresponds to a unit matrix I:
 K iiB K ib   I ii  Tii 
 ⋅ =  (25)
K bi K bb  ϕib   0 
From this equation, it is demonstrated that displacements at internal d.o.f.’s of substructure B correspond to rigid
body modes matrix: ϕib = − K ib ⋅ K −bb1 . (26)
Other important consideration of equations system (25), is that, by definition, elastic forces Tii necessary to perform
rigid body motions should be zero. From this expression (25) the calculation of elastic forces is as follows:
Tii = K iiB − K ib ⋅ K −bb1 ⋅ K bi = [0] = K *iib (27)
Last expression states an important conclusion: reduced stiffness matrix of substructure B to an isostatic
interface is zero. In order words, just in this case in which interface between substructures A and B is
isostatic, local analysis (with stiffness modifications) of substructure A can be exactly performed by static
condensation or internal forces methods, because these approaches are now identical.
922
Second Edition
6.3.6.4 Boundary Enforced Displacement Method
Other submodelling technique to analyse locally substructure A consists in enforce displacements δi at interface
d.o.f.’s (set i), considering also the applied forces Fa at the internal d.o.f.’s (set a).
K aa K ai  δ a   Fa 
K ⋅ =  (21)
 ia K iiA   δ i  R i 
First equations system from above expression gives the static solution for substructure A:
K aa ⋅ δ a = (Fa − K ai ⋅ δ i ) (22)
External force term in expression (22) is dependent on displacements at interface d.o.f.’s (set i), and, on stiffness
changes of substructure A (Kai). This means that any stiffness modification in substructure A will imply a
perturbation of this external force term. This lead to the same important conclusion again: there is an inherent
inaccuracy in local analysis of substructure A, using enforced displacements method when stiffness changes are
performed in this substructure A.
Fa
a A
Enforced displacements at interface : δi
Enforced Displacements Submodelling Method for Substructure A
923
Second Edition
6.3.6.5 Numerical Example of Submodelling
6.3.6.5.1 Example 1 – No Local (Substructure A) Stiffness Modification
To emphasize the application of submodelling methods, herein it is presented a simple example of structure divided
in two substructures. Substructure to be locally analyzed is A.
Substructure B Substructure A
10 3 5
10 2 5 60
1 20
10 4 20
Global structure analysis is performed and solved with the following system of equations:
 30 − 10 − 10 0  δ 2  − 20 δ 2   4 
− 10 15    
− 5  δ 3   0  δ   6 
 0  3  
⋅ =  ⇒  = 
− 10 0 30 − 20 δ 4   0  δ 4   8 
    
 0 − 5 − 20 25  δ 5   60  δ5  10
Example 1 – No Local (Substructure A) Stiffness Modification: Substructuring Using Static Condensation
Performing static condensation of substructure B:

 30 − 10 − 10 (2)
 K bb K bi  
KB =  B  =  − 10 10 0  (3)
K
 ib K ii 
− 10 0 10  (4)
[K ] = [K ] − [K ][K ] [K ]
*b
ii
B
ii ib bb
−1
bi
{F }= {F } − [K ][K ] {F }
i
*b
i ib bb
−1
b
[K ] = 100 100  − −− 10

*b
ii
 1
⋅ ⋅ [− 10
10 30
− 10] = 10 
 2 − 1 (3)
3  − 1 2  (4)
   
0  − 10 1
{F }
*b
=  − 
1 (3)
⋅ ⋅ {− 20} = − 20  
0  − 10 30
i 3 1 (4)
Now, local analysis of substructure A, considering static condensation of B, is performed:
  K iiA K ia   K *iib 0  δ i   0  Fi*b 
 +    =   +  
 K
 ai K aa   0 0  δ a  Fa   0 
Establishing system of equations and solving:

 5 0 −5   2 − 1 0   δ 3   0  1 δ   6 
  10        20    3   
 0 20 − 20 +  − 1 2 0  δ 4  =  0  − 1 ⇒ δ 4  =  8 
  − 5 − 20 25  3  0 0 0  δ  60 3 0 δ  10
     5       5  
Displacement results for substructure A are the same than those obtained from global structure as expected.
924
Second Edition
Example 1 – No Local (Substructure A) Stiffness Modification: Internal Forces Method
K iiA K ia   δ i   0  − K *iib ⋅ δ i + Fi*b 

   =   +  
 K ai K aa  δ a  Fa   0 
− K *iib ⋅ δ i + Fi*b = − 10 
3 − 1 2  8 
+ ( = )
 2 − 1 6 − 20 1 − 20
3 1 − 40
     
5 0 − 5  δ3  − 20
0    
 20 − 20 δ 4  = − 40
− 5 − 20 25  δ5   60 
Above system of equations has a singular stiffness matrix and cannot be solved. A restraint condition is needed:
considering δ4 = 8, the rest of displacements can be calculated, resulting in:
δ 3   6 
   
δ 4  =  8 
δ  10
 5  
that are, again, the expected displacement results in substructure A.
Example 1 – No Local (Substructure A) Stiffness Modification: Enforced Displacement Method

K aa ⋅ δ a = (Fa − K ai ⋅ δ i )
6
25 ⋅ δ 5 = 60 − [− 5 − 20] 
8
That gives δ5= 10, the same expected results.
925
Second Edition
6.3.6.5.2 Example 2 – Local (Substructure A) Stiffness Modification

Suppose that substructure A is changed to the following configuration:
Substructure A
3 5
5 60
4 10
Global structure analysis is performed and solved with the following system of equations:
 30 − 10 − 10 0  δ 2  − 20 δ 2   4 
− 10 15    
− 5  δ 3   0  δ   6.4 
 0  3  
⋅  =   ⇒  = 
− 10 0 20 − 10 δ 4   0  δ
 4  7. 6 
         
 0 − 5 − 10 15 δ
  5  60  δ
 5  11 . 2
Example 2 – Local (Substructure A) Stiffness Modification: Substructuring Using Static Condensation
Local analysis of substructure A considering static condensation of B

  K iiA K ia   K *iib 0  δ i   0  Fi*b 
 +    =   +  
 K
  ai K aa   0 0  δ a  Fa   0 
Establishing system of equations and solving:
 5 0 −5  2 − 1 0   δ 3   0  1  δ   6.4 
  10        20    3   
 0 10 − 10 + − 1 2 0  δ 4  =  0  − 1  ⇒ δ 4  =  7.6 
  − 5 − 10 15  3  0 0 0  δ 5  60
3      
   0 δ 5  11.2
Displacement results for substructure A are exactly the same than those obtained from global structure as
expected.
We shall demonstrate a worked example using static condensation with MSC/NASTRAN superelement
capabilities. First, perform static condensation run of substructure B, using DMIGOP2 option.
SOL 101
TIME 5
DIAG 14
CEND
TITLE = DMIGOP2, RUN 1
PARAM,EXTOUT,DMIGOP2
SPC=1
LOAD=1
BEGIN BULK
ASET1 1 3 4
GRID 1 0. 0. 0.
GRID 2 1. 0. 0.
GRID 3 2. 1. 0.
GRID 4 2. 0. 0.
926
Second Edition
CELAS2 1 10. 1 1 2 1
CELAS2 2 10. 2 1 3 1
CELAS2 3 10. 2 1 4 1
SPC1 1 123456 1
SPC1 1 23456 2
SPC1 1 23456 3
SPC1 1 23456 4
FORCE 1 2 -20. 1. 0. 0.
ENDDATA
From this run a fort.30 file is output with binary output2 format, containing reduced stiffness matrix and reduced
load vector at interface d.o.f.’s declared in ASET1 card. Next perform local analysis of substructure A.
ASSIGN INPUTT2='fort.30',UNIT=30
SOL 101
TIME 5
CEND
TITLE = DMIGOP2, RUN 2
SPC=1
SUBCASE 1
SUPER=10,1
SUBCASE 2
DISP=ALL
SUPER=20,1
LOAD=1
SUBCASE 3
SUPER=0,1
LOAD=1
BEGIN BULK
PARAM EXTUNIT 30
SEBULK 10 EXTERNAL
BEGIN SUPER=10
$ Substructure B (external superelement)
EXTRN 3 1 4 1
GRID 3 2. 1. 0.
GRID 4 2. 0. 0.
BEGIN SUPER=20
$ Substructure A
GRID 3 2. 1. 0.
GRID 4 2. 0. 0.
GRID 5 3. 0. 0.
CELAS2 4 5. 3 1 5 1
CELAS2 5 10. 4 1 5 1
SPC1 1 23456 3
SPC1 1 23456 4
SPC1 1 23456 5
FORCE 1 5 60. 1. 0. 0.
ENDDATA
Internal d.o.f.’s displacements of substructure A and interface d.o.f.’s displacements are output in F06 file:
DATA RECOVERY FOR SUPERELEMENT 20 IS NOW INITIATED.
DMIGOP2, RUN 2 MAY 5, 2000 MSC.NASTRAN 10/11/99 PAGE 24
SUPERELEMENT 20 , 1
SUBCASE 2
D I S P L A C E M E N T V E C T O R
POINT ID. TYPE T1 T2 T3 R1 R2 R3

3 G 6.400000E+00 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0
4 G 7.600000E+00 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0
5 G 1.120000E+01 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0
927
Second Edition
Example 2 – Local (Substructure A) Stiffness Modification: Internal Forces Method
5 0 − 5  δ 3  − 20
0    
 10 − 10 δ 4  = − 40
− 5 − 10 15  δ 5   60 
Above system of equations has a singular stiffness matrix and cannot be solved. A restraint condition is needed:
considering δ4 = 8, the rest of displacements can be calculated, resulting in:
δ 3   8 
   
δ 4  =  8 
δ  12
 5  
that are incorrect and clearly different than expected.
Example 2 – Local (Substructure A) Stiffness Modification: Enforced Displacement Method
K aa ⋅ δ a = (Fa − K ai ⋅ δ i )
6
15 ⋅ δ 5 = 60 − [− 5 − 10] 
8
That gives δ5= 11.333, that is, again, an incorrect result.
928
Second Edition
6.3.6.6 Static Submodelling Methods Summary
Three static submodelling methods are suggested, namely internal force method, enforced displacement method
and static condensation substructuring using superelements. The internal force method applies cut boundary
forces at all the cut boundaries of the submodel, constraining the submodel anywhere really such that it is just
statically determinate. The reactions will be found to be zero (or close to zero if the geometry is accurate and there
are no significant Poisson effects along the constrained boundary in 2D and 3D models) because the submodel is
subject to a self-equilibrating set of forces. The limitation is only that changes in stiffness of the submodel (due to
design geometry or material changes or simply due to the fact that the stiffness will change from the global model
to the local model) will produce inaccuracies in the solution. Physically, this is so because if you change the local
stiffness of the submodel, the force will either be more attracted or less attracted depending on whether you
increase the stiffness or decrease it. A special case occurs when the rest of the structure is ‘isostatically mounted
upon the submodel’ i.e. for instance a tree where the submodel is the trunk and the rest of the structure is the
branches. In this special case, the internal force method will be exact.
The enforced displacement method applies cut boundary displacements at all the cut boundaries of the submodel.
No further constraints are required as the submodel will probably no longer be singular due to the application of the
enforced displacements, failing which it is perfectly acceptable to constrain the mechanisms such that the submodel
is statically determinate. Again the reactions will be found to be zero because the submodel is self-equilibrating. St.
Venant’s principle states “if an actual distribution of forces is replaced by a statically equivalent system, the
distribution of stress and strain is altered only near the regions of load application. This implies that stress
concentration effects are localized around the concentration; therefore, if the boundaries of the submodel are far
enough away from the stress concentration, reasonably accurate results can be calculated in the submodel”.
Because the submodel will usually be of a finer mesh density, it becomes necessary to interpolate displacements
from those at known points along the cut boundaries to all the nodes along the cut boundaries. The limitations of
the enforced displacement method is the same as that as for the internal force method, being that inaccuracies are
introduced when stiffness changes are made to the submodel.
The substructuring method using the static condensation capability of superelements reproduces the exact
state of stress and displacements in the local model compared to that of the global model. Apart from refined stress
analysis on the detailed local model, stiffness modifications can be made to the local model for local redesign
iterations, investigation into local buckling analysis and the modelling of localized non-linearity (to the submodel)
can be made. The exact solution is obtained so long as the rest of the structure is modeled with superelements. The
stiffness (and internal forces) of the rest of the structure is contained within the superelements, hence it is like
modelling the entire structure, only that computationally it is far more efficient.
929
Second Edition
6.3.7 Submodelling Techniques for Dynamic Analysis
6.3.7.1 Submodelling by Substructuring - Static Condensation (Guyan Reduction) using Superelements
For linear dynamic analysis, the static condensation technique is only an approximation (unlike linear static
analysis where it is exact) of the whole structure behaviour, and methods with highest efficiency are the ones based
on modal synthesis. However, static condensation becomes exact for dynamic analysis if there are no loads
applied onto the o-set DOFs, i.e. the set of freedoms omitted by static condensation.
6.3.7.2 Submodelling by Substructuring - Generalized Dynamic Reduction (GDR) using Superelements
Generalized dynamic reduction (GDR) offers a more accurate solution by including an approximation of the
dynamic effects when forming the transformation. Bulk Data entries for GDR are DYNRED, QSET, and QSET1,
and SPOINT. In addition, the Case Control command DYNRED is also required.
6.3.7.3 Submodelling by Substructuring - Component Mode Synthesis (CMS) using Superelements
Component mode synthesis (CMS) is a form of superelement dynamic reduction wherein matrices are defined in
terms of modal coordinates (corresponding to the superelement modes) and physical coordinates (corresponding to
the grid points on the superelement boundaries). CMS is advantageous because there are fewer modal coordinates
than physical coordinates—perhaps only one percent as many. In addition, CMS can utilize modal test data,
thereby increasing the accuracy of the overall analysis.
930
Second Edition
6.3.8 Modelling Flat Plates Using 2D Shells or 1D Grillages
Grillage analyses may sometimes be used to model flat plates such as flat slabs. A grillage consists of 1D beams in
two orthogonal directions to replicate the two-way spanning action that flat shells or plates perform perfectly. Two
types of models may be used in both 1D grillages and 2D shells, i.e. with torsional stiffness or without. If torsional
stiffness is specified, then it must be designed for. For the shell, the correct shear modulus G according to linear
elastic theory G = E/(2(1+ν)) should model the torsional stiffness and thus must be designed for. To not have to
design for the torsion, the shear modulus G should be manually set very low, although this makes the assumption
that there is no shear flexibility modeled. This is because the shear rigidity is given approximately by GAs i.e. a
function of the shear modulus as well.
Now for grillages to replicate shells or plates, firstly since beams are used in two orthogonal directions, the density
of the beams must be halved in order not to double up; Secondly, the bending rigidity D for a plate in theory
should be EI/(1-ν2) instead of EI as for a rectangular beam. Thirdly, if torsion is to be designed for, the torsional
rigidity GJ should be such that it is equal to the bending rigidity EI so that there is equal bending stiffness of
the plate about any horizontal axis. Since G = E/(2(1+ν)), J should be set such that J = EI/G = 2I(1+ν). One of the
advantages of using grillages instead of shells is the ability to design out torsional effects, i.e. by putting J = 0,
shear deformations are still accounted for since G is still defined.
6.3.9 Modelling Down-Stand Beams on Structural Floors, Pile Caps and Changes in Thickness of Plates
Floor slabs with down-stand beams, pile caps or changes in thickness of the plate should be modeled with offsets
to the neutral axis of the local section. Down-stand beams should be modeled with offsets from the shells
elements to the centroid of the down-stand beam, which is modeled as beam elements, NOT shells. Pile caps or
local changes in thickness of a plate can be modeled with local shells offset (to their neutral axis) from the general
plate elevation.
Connections between elements should be at their neutral axis. Connections of slabs with offset beams are no
different, the elastic neutral axis should be found and both the beams and the slabs should be offset from their
common neutral axis to connect into column (beam) elements. This is important especially so in linear dynamic
problems where an incorrect connection point will result in incorrect mode shapes.
To model the offset in MSC.NASTRAN, three methods can be used. RBE2 or RBAR, both with ALL 6 DOFs of
the single dependent grid constrained to ALL 6 DOFs of the single independent grid, repeated over each and every
offset grid pair can be used. Alternatively this can be automated easily using ZOFFS on the shell element
connection card, this being the recommended approach. Lastly, we could also use MID4, but this is not
recommended.
Note that offsets should be modeled because their would considerably increase the bending stiffness due to the Ar2
stiffness terms (by parallel axes theorem). Clearly both the bending stiffness and the membrane stiffness of the
shell is required if offsets are modeled.
6.3.10 Modelling Stiffened Plates
Modelling stiffeners using plate elements usually results in a too stiff representation. Stiffeners require cubic
displacement functions to model the bending action, but shells in membrane action are capable of only linear or
parabolic displacement interpolation. Hence, a single or two-shell element stiffener representation is almost always
too stiff and peak stresses will be severely overestimated. Of course, with refinement, the model approaches the
correct stiffness. The recommended approach is instead to use offset CBAR beam elements to model the stiffeners.
931
Second Edition
6.3.11 Modelling Connections
Rigid joints do not allow relative rotation between connecting members whereas pinned joints do not transfer
bending moments. Within the analysis code, a pinned ended beam element is akin to having a zero-length rigid link
between the connecting members in all the DOFs except the rotational DOF that corresponds to the bending
moment. This also means that we could theoretically model a partial fixity with a zero-length rotational spring
between the rotational DOFs of the connecting elements. Modelling steel frames with pinned connections may
sometimes be appropriate if we desire that all lateral loads are taken by the bracing members instead of through the
moment connections. However, the rotations at pinned connection will be much greater, and the design must
account for this. However, trusses are usually triangulated so that the lateral forces are accounted for by the
inclined elements. Monolithic concrete frames are modeled with fixed connections. Connections in timber are
usually pinned.
RBE2 or RBAR elements can be used to define hinges or sliding joints. To model a hinge connection with an
RBAR, use coincident grid points at the center of rotation and define an RBAR between the two grid points. This
RBAR has zero length, which is acceptable for the RBAR. Make ALL 6 of the components associated with one
grid point independent. Make only a select number of components of the other grid point dependent, leaving
independent the components representing the hinge. With RBE2, again connect the two coincident nodes with an
RBE2 with all DOFs of the dependent grid except that representing the hinge automatically dependent on ALL 6
DOFs of the independent grid. Both connections are then exactly the same. RBE2 is characteristic in the sense that
ALL 6 DOFs of the independent grid is automatically selected, the user then has the option of selecting the DOFs
of the dependent grid, but of more than one grid if intended. RBAR on the other hand, allows the option of
selecting the DOFs of both the independent and dependent grid, but of only one pair.
Modelling pinned connections in 2D and 3D elements require different considerations. Consider the modelling
of a thin 2D lever with a pinned connection. The lever is allowed to pivot about a pin through its mounting hole.
The interface between the lever and the pin is of consideration. Of course, to restrain all the nodes along the curve
of the hole in translational and leaving the rotational DOFs free with respect to the basic coordinate system, is
blatantly incorrect. To connect a ‘spider’ i.e. an RBE2 to all the dependent nodes on the curve of the hole and pin
the independent node defined in the middle of the mounting hole may be acceptable, but this does (incorrectly) add
stiffness to the model or rather an infinite rigidity around the hole (as if there was firstly, infinite friction between
the curve lining the mounting hole and the pin, and secondly no allowance for the hole to expand radially or squash
into an oval shape) as the constrained nodes cannot move in translation relative to each other, and hence the stress
distribution around the hole will be totally incorrect. Another method to model this pinned connection would be to
define independent SPCs around the outline curve of the hole, but ensuring that a local coordinate systems in
cylindrical coordinates (a spherical coordinate system will be used in 3D problems requiring a pinned
connection) is defined for all the constrained nodes. The nodes are of course constrained only in the radial
direction to achieve the desired pivoting effect. Now each point on the curve of the hole is allowed to move
tangentially and hence no stiffness or rigidity (or friction between curve lining the mounting hole and the pin) is
added to the model and hence will produce the correct effect as the lever is allowed to pivot. But the stress
distribution around the hole will still be inaccurate because the SPC would incorrectly resist the pull of the nodes
away from the pin (hence not allowing the hole to expand) on top of correctly resisting the push. Hence, a manual
iterative method must be undertaken to remove the SPCs that are resisting the pull of the lever away from the pin
by inspecting the sign of the reaction on the SPCs. Gradually all the offending SPCs will be removed and the
correct solution will be achieved. This similar effect can be attained automatically by modelling the pin explicitly
and defining contact elements between the lever and the pin. This is probably the best method to model the
pinned connection (be it in 2D or 3D). These contact elements can clearly resist the push but will not resist the
separation between the lever and the pin. Of course, the orientation of these contact elements must be normal to the
interface curves.
932
Second Edition
6.3.12 Modelling Spot Welds
Spot welds are best modeled with CBUSH elements with large stiffness in all 6 DOFs in MSC.NASTRAN.
Alternatively, RBAR or RBE2 (both with ALL 6 DOFs of the single dependent grid constrained to ALL
6DOFs of the single independent grid, repeated over each and every spot weld grid pair) elements may be
used effectively. CELAS elements can also be used but is not recommended as apart from being extremely difficult
to set up, problems with the generation of internal constraints may arise.
The CWELD and PWELD entries are also ideal. Connections can now be established with ease between points,
elements, patches, or any of their combinations. In short, the new CWELD connector element is general in purpose,
easy to generate, less error-prone than any of the preceding methods, and always satisfies the condition of rigid
body invariance. Test and analysis correlation has also been shown to be excellent. Connections can either be
established conventionally, from point-to-point, or in a more advanced fashion between elements and/or patches of
grid points. In the case of elements and patches, actual weld attachment points will usually occur within element
domains or patches and will be computed automatically, with corresponding automatic creation of necessary grid
points and degrees-of-freedom. Element- and patch-based connections, moreover, eliminate the need for congruent
meshes. Reference grids that determine spot weld spacing, for example, can be defined beforehand which, when
projected (using the CWELD entry) through the surfaces to be attached, uniquely determine the weld elements’
location and geometry.
6.3.13 Modelling Bolts
CBAR elements can be used to model bolt element within a 2D or 3D mesh. Rigid elements can be used to model
the finite dimension of the diameter of the bolt head or washer. Now if there is no tolerance between the bolt and its
hole, then the bolt can be modeled with CROD elements to transfer only axial (and torsional) forces.
933
Second Edition
6.3.14 Modelling Applied Loads
6.3.14.1 Applied Concentrated Loads on One Dimensional Elements
CBAR elements have cubic polynomial displacement functions, thus models linear variation in bending moment.
Hence, point loads and moments should be only applied at the end nodes of the beam. A single structural beam
member should be discretized by a number of CBAR elements to model the internal point loads. An internal point
load results in a piecewise cubic variation of the transverse displacement, a mode of deformation that is not
captured by the continuous cubic variation of the two-noded beam finite element. A continuous uniformly
distributed load within a beam finite element results in a continuous quartic variation of the transverse
displacement, again a mode of deformation that is not subsumed by the continuous cubic variation of the finite
element. Applying internal loads onto beam elements will cause the equivalent nodal loads that the code computes
based on the assumed interpolation function to be inaccurate. Hence the nodal displacements will in turn be
inaccurate. On the other hand, if the loads are only applied at the nodes, we can be sure that the correct behavior is
captured and thus there is no need for mesh refinement.
6.3.14.2 Applied Face and Line Loads on Two and Three Dimensional Elements
Unlike beam elements, loads applied to shell elements should not be point loads or moments applied at the nodes.
In theory, the stress under a point load is infinite and as the mesh is refined, the finite element method attempts to
replicate the infinite stress. Consider a point load F at a single node with a characteristic element length ‘a’. As the
model is refined, ‘a’ becomes smaller, and so the stress F/a becomes larger and tends toward infinity in the limit.
This causes singularity. Now consider a pressure or distributed load P over n nodes. As the model is refined, the
area of the pressure application stays the same, because it is related to the physical problem and not the mesh.
While the number of nodes sharing in the pressure increases, the applied force at each node will decrease. The
stress is equal to the pressure independently of the number of nodes, so there is no tendency towards infinity, and
therefore no singularity. Singularities thus exist when a point load or likewise an SPC is applied to a shell or solid
mesh simply due to the nature of a node having no area in the FEM. Even a needle tip, when observed under a
microscope shows a finite tip radius. A point load in FEA on the other hand is applied on a node with no area.
Hence the stress within the adjacent element increases as the mesh is refined. The results will never converge as the
mesh is refined, as the solution become mesh-dependent. This is bad enough in h-element analysis, more so in p-
element model, where the code will attempt to converge in a futile attempt. Hence, it is best to distribute the point
load over a line or area although the interpolation function cannot model the resulting deformations exactly. This is
perfectly acceptable, as unlike 1D beams, meshes of 2D shells have to be refined. Note that face loads (applied as a
stress) are dependent upon the geometry of the face of the shell and line edge loads (applied as a stress) are
dependent upon the thickness and the edge dimension of the shell. The following table lists the load and boundary
conditions that will and will not cause a singularity.
Load or Constraint on Beam Shell Solid
Point No Yes Yes
Curve or edge No No Yes
Surface or face N/A No No
Face or line loads should never be applied manually as individual equivalent concentrated loads. That is to say, a
face pressure load should not be decomposed by the user by multiplying by the area and dividing by the number of
grids on the face and applying these average concentrated loads all the grids on the face. This is because the user’s
equivalent loading WOULD NOT be comparable to the true consistent loading. The equivalent loads at the grid
points computed from the element loads are known as consistent loads, and they are calculated by applying the
principle of virtual work.
{f } = − {∫ [N] {b} dΩ}
Ω
Τ
The same shape function that is used in deriving the element stiffness is used for arriving at this load-and hence the
word consistent load. They are a function of the element types and the applied loads.
934
Second Edition
6.3.14.3 Applied Concentrated Loads on Two and Three Dimensional Elements
Rigid elements such as RBE2 (with ALL 6 DOFs of the many dependent grids constrained automatically to
ALL 6 DOFs of the single independent grid where the load is applied) are usually used to distribute specified
force or moment to be applied onto a 2D or 3D mesh. Clearly, the independent grid point must correspond in
space to the point of application of the external load, i.e. the elastic neutral axis of the section.
Alternatively the RBE3 element may be used. The RBE3 element is a powerful tool for distributing applied loads
and mass in a model. Unlike the RBAR and RBE2, the RBE3 does not add additional stiffness to your structure
(a 2D shell mesh of a hollow tube being applied with a force or moment using an RBE2 “spider” to constrain all
the grids on the section to the independent grid at the neutral axis center adds stiffness to the hollow tube section).
Forces and moments applied to reference points are distributed to a set of independent degrees of freedom based on
the RBE3 geometry and local weight factors. Basically, the external force is applied on the reference grid
REFGRID in the component DOF direction REFC. The default action of this element is to place the REFC
degrees of freedom in the m-set denoted by the grids GMi and components CMi after the field “UM”. C1 is then
ALL 3 translational component (rotational components only used in special circumstances) numbers of the first
group of independent grids G1,1, G1,2, G1,3,G1,4 etc … where the load is to be transferred to.
$ BULK DATA
RBE3 EID REFGRID REFC WT1 C1 G1,1 G1,2
G1,3 WT2 C2 G2,1 G2,2 Etc… WT3 C3
G3,1 G3,2 Etc… WT4 C4 G4,1 G4,2 Etc…
“UM” GM1 CM1 GM2 CM2 GM3 CM3
GM4 CM4 GM5 CM5 Etc…
To define a “spider” to transfer the beam type forces onto a 2D shell or 3D solid mesh, the REFGRID should
correspond to a grid defined at the elastic neutral axis (centroid of section), the REFC should correspond to the
component direction where the forces act i.e. in general 123456, WT1 denotes the weighting factor of the first
group i.e. 1.0 for equal weighting here, C1 as 123 denotes the all three translational components of the independent
grids of the first group G1,i which are the grids around the section. Note that C1 should be 123 even if there is
force in only one or two translational directions. This is a software requirement as with all R-type elements to avoid
singularity, not an engineering requirement. C1 should generally NEVER have any rotational components 456.
Here only one group has been defined. Different groups are only required for different weighting factor to
distribute the force. This occurs in certain groups of grids are deemed to be of different stiffness to the other grids.
If a group of grids is deemed to be less stiff and hence attracting less force than that to the other grids, it will be
justifiable to use a lower weighting factor to distribute less force to those group of grids.
935
Second Edition
6.3.15 Modelling Support Conditions
When supporting 2D shells, it is best to apply the support conditions on all the nodes along the edge including the
mid-side nodes in order to obtain a smooth stress variation along the edge. There will be a smooth variation of the
bending stresses along and perpendicular to the edge and the through-thickness shear stress variation along and
perpendicular to the edge. No stress singularity is introduced if the support condition is applied along the line.
Of course, analogous to an applied point load, A SINGLE SPC applied on a 2D or 3D mesh will result in a
singularity because a finite force value is applied on a node which has no area, hence the stress which is the
force/area is infinite. The following table lists the load and boundary conditions that will and will not cause a
singularity.

Point No Yes Yes
However, if stress recovery at the regions of the stress singularity is not required, then St. Venant’s Principle,
which states that stress and deflection far from an applied load or constraint can be represented by a statically
equivalent loading scenario, can be invoked. One of the fortunate characteristics of the FEM is that local effect will
most likely have little effect on the global behaviour.
Support stiffness is sometimes incorporated in the form of a ground spring, this may for instance model piles or
foundations of different relative stiffness. This is only done to model the differential settlement. If the relative
stiffness of ALL the supports is the same, then there is no reason to model the support stiffnesses. A ground spring
is simply a spring eventually totally constrained to a rigid support. Reducing the stiffness of a support spring will
probably reduce the force going into that support constraint, but the load must be accounted for elsewhere, i.e. all
the load must be eventually accounted for. The total reactions must balance the total applied loading (assuming no
ill-conditioning effects).
936
Second Edition
6.3.16 Primary and Secondary Component in Dynamic Analysis
Primary and Secondary Systems

kp mp ks ms
Idealization when ωs/ωp > 2.0

kp mp + ms
Idealization when ωs/ωp < 0.5

kp mp ks
Secondary components may have to be included into the dynamic model of the primary component if they have
frequencies comparable to those of the primary component. It is not the mass or the stiffness of the secondary
component in isolation that matters in deciding whether they are dynamically prominent, but their natural
frequencies. If the resonant frequencies of the secondary component are greater (ωs/ωp > 2.0) than those of the
primary model, then they can be modeled as added mass on the primary system. If the resonant frequencies of the
secondary component are lower (ωs/ωp < 0.5) than those of the primary model, then they can be modeled as
stiffness (which are grounded, hence no mass DOF) on the primary system. Otherwise, the secondary system must
be included within the dynamic model of the primary system.
6.3.17 Modelling Rigid Body Motion
An excellent method of evaluating whether the intended rigid body motion is correctly represented within the finite
element model is to perform a SOL 103. Note that AUTOSPC may have to be set to the non default value of NO to
avoid grid point singularities from being constrained. The eigenvalue analysis also cannot model local mechanisms
(identified by a critical MAXRATIO). But the eigenvalue analysis can model global mechanisms, i.e. the rigid
body motion. The correct stiffness properties, boundary conditions and rigid element DOF dependency can be
adjusted until the correct rigid body motions (at zero or close to zero frequencies) are obtained from visual
inspection of the eigenvectors following an eigenvalue SOL 103 analysis.
937
Second Edition
6.3.18 Meshing Strategies
With mesh refinement, the results will converge to the true solution for displacements and stresses. Stress analysis
requires a much finer mesh density than static displacement response. This is because of the rate of convergence of
displacement response being much greater than that of the stress. It would thus help to allow for fine discretization
in regions of high stress gradient and stress concentrations such as: -
(a) near entrant corners, or sharply curved edges – using chordal deviation automatic meshing techniques say
(b) in the vicinity of concentrated loads, concentrated reactions, cracks and cutouts
(c) in the interior of structures with abrupt changes in thickness, material properties or cross sectional areas
For 1D meshing, linear1D (1D elements from one 2D plane to another) or the linemesh automesher (line
mesh along a line) can be used.
For 2D meshing, uniform well shaped quadrilateral meshing is possible using spline and ruled within defined
boundaries. It is also possible to extrude (along an arbitrary line) or to revolve a line to generate a 2D mesh. In
the limit, the 2D automesher can be used to mesh irregularly any arbitrary planar surfaces with a combination of
quads and triads.
For 3D meshing, only volumes that can foreseeably be generated from extruding (in general along an arbitrary
line) or revolving a planar 2D mesh can be meshed uniformly with the more accurate hexagonal elements.
Meshing an enclosed volume of arbitrary shape often results in having to utilize the automesher (using either a
fixed nominal element size or using chordal deviation techniques that refines the mesh size as the radius of
curvature decreases), which employs tetrahedral meshes, hence a.k.a. tetramesher. CTETRA4 are constant strain
elements and hence should be minimized since many more elements are required for convergence. The arbitrary
volume can be better mapped with CTETRA10 elements utilizing the mid side node to model the surface curvature.
Second order elements (QUAD8, TRIA6, TETRA10 and HEXA20) are useful in better approximating the
curvature of the actual geometry due to their mid-side nodes. Hence it may be better to generate the mesh with
second order elements straight away than to mesh with first order elements and only then change to second order
elements. Automeshers are generally tetrameshers. Hexagonal automeshers are rare if not nonexistent, although a
fair estimate would be that one would need 5 tetrahedrons for every brick element.
Employing the automesher requires a clean geometry. For transferring geometry, kernel based geometry formats
such as ACIS and Parasolids are recommended. Standard based geometry formats such as IGES, DXF and VDA
may lead to translation errors. Inheriting a CAD geometry model often requires a cleanup operation to yield
geometry suitable for the automesher. This process is certainly worth embarking upon before employing the
automesher. One aspect of the geometry that must be cleaned up is short edges and sliver surfaces. Short edges
occur in geometry when lines or surfaces do not meet exactly at the same point due to misalignment of features.
Sliver surfaces (i.e. geometry surfaces with high aspect ratio) occur in geometry due to misalignment of
features or due to the close proximity of fillet edges to other edges. Short edges and sliver surfaces with a
dimension short compared to either the model size, or more importantly the nominal mesh size, will introduce
errors into the model by forcing one edge of a triangle or quadrilateral to the length of that short dimension. This
occurs because the automesher will try to space nodes on the geometry edges first and then within the geometry
surfaces at the defined nominal element size. Since most automeshers are constrained to use every node and edge
of the model, when short edges or short dimensions are encountered, a side of an element will be placed on the
short edge whilst the other sides of the element will be of the user defined nominal element size. This clearly
causes highly distorted elements. Limiting the size of the short edges to no less than 1/3 of the nominal element
size is good practice. In short, the geometry should be checked for both short edges and sliver surfaces. The former
is identified by checking for any short edge that may exist in the geometry due to the misalignment of lines or
surfaces edges that should meet at a common point or common line, respectively. The latter is identified by
firstly, checking for surfaces with high aspect ratio due to short edges which in turn is due to the misalignment of
lines or surfaces that should meet at a common point or common line, respectively and secondly, by identifying
lines or surface edges of close proximity belonging to different features.
938
Second Edition
6.3.19 Mesh Transition Techniques
6.3.19.1 Connecting 1D Elements to 2D Elements
When connecting 2D shells to beams in the same plane, it is best to connect the beam to the mid-side nodes of the
shells as well to ensure compatibility between the elements. Offsets should be modeled as this affects the stiffness
greatly. No stress singularity is introduced as the beams are connected to all nodes lining an edge of shell elements
within or on the edge of the shell mesh.
When connecting one dimensional beam elements to shells orthogonally, special considerations must be observed.
2D shells are often used to model irregular flat slabs with 1D beams modelling the vertical columns. Very often we
incorrectly model vertical columns fixed into a horizontal mesh of 2D shells at a particular node and perform stress
recovery at the intersection. Obviously, as a 2D mesh is refined, theoretically, the stress (be it the bending or the
shear) at the point of intersection goes to infinity (stress singularity), and the 2D mesh attempts to replicate that.
However, since stress recovery (bending moment) at the pile tops are usually of concern in design for hogging, to
read those values would be very much dependent upon the mesh size (mesh-dependent) and would simply be
meaningless. Infinite stresses will result irrespective of the stress recovery procedure used in the shells, whether
BILINEAR, CUBIC etc. Incidentally, if the mesh is not so fine, one can obtain pretty believable (but incorrect)
answers, as the regions of stress concentration have not been reached. But it is when you refine the mesh that you
suddenly start to get huge variations of stress (hence derived moment) and great discontinuities. To think that
people normally associate 2D elements to give you more accurate results. One method is to use rigid RBE2s
connecting the beam to a few nodes on the shell mesh in order to distribute the point load. The area over which the
point load is distributed should replicate reality. The rigid connection should connect to all the nodes on the 2D
element mesh within the relevant vicinity, i.e. including also the mid-side nodes. There will be no stress singularity.
Another method is to mesh the pile tops of slab with beams with the same stiffness in line with methods of grillage
analysis. Alternatively, a rigid may be incorporated with a dimension of the pile diameter to model the pile top,
which is much stiffer and does not in reality act like a beam since it is very much constrained by the pile. These
methods would be akin to moving the mesh transition region (here between two different elements in 1D beams
and 2D shells) from the vicinity of interest (for stress recovery). But stress singularity still exists at the transition.
Similar considerations apply when stress recovery is intended

on the slabs over the edges supported monolithically by edge
piles, which transfer moments. Again the edges of the slab
can be meshed with beams in line with the methods of
grillage analysis. But stress singularity still exists at the
transition. Alternatively, since the slab is in series with the
piles, the moment experienced at the edges of the slab must
be equivalent to the moment in the piles. Hence the moment
in the piles can be used to design for the moment in the edges
of the slab.
939
Second Edition
Solid elements have stiffness only in the translational DOFs at the attachment grid points; they have no stiffness for
rotational DOFs. To connect a shell into a 3D mesh requires special modelling to connect the rotational DOFs of
the shell into the 3D solid mesh. One method would be to add an additional layer of shells that continue into the
solid mesh. Another method would be to use RBE2s (each RBE2 with ALL 6 DOFs of the many dependent
grids on the solid mesh constrained automatically to ALL 6 DOFs of the single independent grid on the shell
mesh) to rigidly connect the translational and rotational stiffnesses of the shell mesh to the translational stiffnesses
of the solid mesh, although this will locally increase the model stiffness.
RBE3s can be used to model the connection between shells and solids. By using RBE3s, the rotations of the
attached grid points are simply slaved to the translations of the adjacent grid points. In the following example, two
RBE3 cards are required. These RBE3 elements transmit the loads to the independent DOFs. If RBE2 elements are
used, then the connection is “rigid.”
$ BULK DATA
$ RBE3 EID REFGRID REFC WT1 C1 G1,1 G1,2
RBE3 1 1 456 1.0 123 2 3
4
RBE3 2 2 456 1.0 123 1 3
4
An alternate method is to use the RSSCON element. When using the RSSCON capability, the shell element mesh
must line up with the solid element mesh so that there is an exact element-to-element correspondence. RSSCON
generates a multipoint constraint, which puts the shell degrees of freedom in the dependent set (m-set). The three
translational degrees of freedom and the two rotational degrees of freedom of the shell edge are connected to the
three translational degrees of freedom of the upper and lower solid edge. Poisson’s ratio effects and temperature
loads are modeled correctly. There are two options for making this connection using the RSSCON entry, namely
1. The ELEM option, which allows you to specify the element ID of the shell and the element ID of the
solid to which the shell is to be connected.
2. The GRID option, which allows you to specify the grid point ID of the shell and the upper and lower
grid point IDs of the solid. Two triplets of grid point IDs may be specified on one RSSCON entry.
940
Second Edition
The best modelling practice is when the height of the connected solid element is chosen equal to the thickness of
the shell. If the height of the connected solid element is much larger than the thickness of the shell element, then
the connection modeled with RSSCON will be stiffer than the continuum model. In a mesh where shell grid points
are identical or coincide with solid grid points, the RSSCON Bulk Data entry may model a connection that is too
stiff
Connecting a shell into solid by extending the shell one layer into the solid
WILL introduce stress concentrations. The best method would thus be to
use rigids or RSSCON to connect transverse to plane of shell.
Best Modelling Too Stiff Connections
Other versatile connections are presented.

The RSSCON connector produces excellent results if
the user follows good modelling practices. The
geometry of the RSSCON connector is checked, and
fatal messages are issued for invalid connections.
Additional recommendations are given below.
1. Midside noded elements should only be connected

to other midside noded elements. For example, a
CQUAD8 element connected to a CHEXA20
element is acceptable; however, a CQUAD4 element
connected to a PENTA15 element is not allowed.
Elements with missing midside grid points are not
allowed.
2. For midside noded elements, avoid using the

RSSCON where shells connect to triangular solid
faces.
3. Do not mix coordinate systems when using

midside nodes. In other words, when using midside
nodes, do not define a local coordinate system
containing all the shell grid points and the basic
coordinate system to define the solid grid points.
Otherwise, incorrect answers will be generated.
4. Only one edge of a single shell element may connect to a solid surface.
5. Do not connect more than one shell element to one solid element when using the ELEM option.
6. Do not attempt solid-shell connections to severely warped (greater than 20%) mid-side noded solid elements.
7. The plane of the shell element should not be parallel to the plane of the connecting face of the solid element.
8. The connecting edge of the shell element must lie in the face of the solid element. In addition, the vertex grid
points of the shell edge connecting to a quadrilateral solid face must line up with its opposite edges; for triangular
solid faces, the connections may be made between any of the edges.
941
Second Edition
A method would be to use RBE2s to rigidly connect the translational and rotational stiffnesses of the beam to the
translational stiffnesses of the solid mesh, although this will locally increase the model stiffness. Alternatively, one
RBE3 element can make the connection. These RBE3 elements transmit the loads to the independent DOFs. If
RBE2 elements are used, then the connection is “rigid.”
$ BULK DATA
$ RBE3 EID REFGRID REFC WT1 C1 G1,1 G1,2
RBE3 1 12 456 1.0 123 11 13
22
6.3.19.4 Fine to Coarse Mesh Transitions in Shell Meshes
Compatibility would be satisfied across inter-element boundaries barring poor user meshing. For compatibility, the
displacement function must be continuous across element boundaries, i.e. at least C0 continuity at these boundaries.
Inter-element C0 continuity is satisfied for standard TRIA3, TRIA6, QUAD4, QUAD8, HEX8 and HEX20
elements. Compatibility is not satisfied when a QUAD4 is connected to the mid-side nodes of a QUAD8 or a
TRIA3 to the mid-side nodes of a QUAD8 and other poorly formed connections or mesh transitions. Note however
that QUAD8 connected to a TRIA6 will ensure compatibility. A good mesh transition for refinement is simply to
use QUADs (instead of TRIAs) throughout the transition.
QUAD mesh transition
942
Second Edition
6.3.20 Stress Singularity (Artificial Stress Concentration) and St. Venant’s Principle in Linear and
Nonlinear (Material) Analysis
Stress singularities exist when a single point load or a single SPC is applied on a shell or solid mesh. They also
exist when a line of point loads or SPCs are employed on a solid mesh. The following table summarizes these
conditions.
Point No Yes Yes
In perfect analogy, stress singularities also exist when a single beam element connects to a shell mesh. In all
these cases, the stress singularity causes meaningless results as the mesh is refined as the ultimate solution becomes
mesh dependent. Hence, they also cause p-element solution algorithms to fail as the code attempts, in vain, to
converge to a finite solution.
There are no stress singularity problems when shells are connected in plane, except at an internal corner in a
planer shell mesh with zero radius subject to a membrane force where there will be an infinite stress if made
from a perfectly elastic material. Generally, a radius must be created in the corner to achieve a measurable stress.
The confusing issue with modelling this in finite elements is that sensible stresses can be predicted in the corner.
This is just coincidence however; refinement of the mesh would see the stresses in the corner increase without
limit. Internal corners should always be considered in any analysis as a potential failure area and these must have a
realistic fillet radius inserted for convergent stress values to be predicted. Remember that the stress value reported
in a non-filleted internal corner is only dependant on the element size and has nothing to do with any real value that
might occur there.
There is no stress singularity problems when shells are connected out of plane, except when a plane shell mesh
subject to a membrane force is stiffened by another shell mesh oriented perpendicular to it in the direction
of the membrane force.
All these stress singularities can be avoided using proper modelling techniques. Single point loads should not be
applied to a shell mesh, instead only edge loads or pressure loads. A single point load or a line of point loads should
not be applied on a solid mesh, instead only pressure loads should be used. Note that equivalent user defined
multiple point loads to represent edge loads (for shells) or pressure loads (for shells or solids) should not be
attempted as the equivalent nodal loads generated depend on the shape functions of the particular element.
{f } = − {∫Ω [ N]Τ {b} dΩ}
Likewise, a single SPC should not be applied to a shell mesh, instead only a line or a surface patch of SPCs, and in
both cases, SPCs should be applied also on the mid-side nodes of the elements if they exist. A single SPC or a line
of SPCs should not be applied on a solid mesh, instead only a patch of SPCs, but also applying SPCs on the mid-
side nodes of the elements if they exist.
In perfect analogy, when 1D elements connect to 2D or 3D elements, multiple 1D elements should be used to
avoid the stress singularity. For instance multiple gap elements to model the contact interface between two shell or
solid meshes are perfectly acceptable. No stress singularity results. Likewise, no stress singularity exists when a
beam mesh lines the edge of a group of shell elements within or at the edge of a shell mesh. The connection should
however be compatible. Connecting the mid-side nodes if exist is recommended.
Likewise, connecting a 2D shell mesh into a 3D solid mesh by extending the shell one layer into the solid WILL
introduce stress concentrations. The best method would thus be to use rigids or RSSCON to connect transverse to
943
Second Edition
plane of shell so that the membrane force is distributed, whilst still coupling the rotational DOF of the shell into the
solid through their translational DOFs.
However, if stress recovery at the regions of the stress singularity is not required, then St. Venant’s Principle,
which states that stress and deflection far from an applied load or constraint can be represented by a statically
equivalent loading scenario, can be invoked. One of the fortunate characteristics of the FEM is that local effect will
most likely have little effect on the global behaviour. The above St. Venant principle is acceptable for linear
analysis (on h-element analysis bur not linear adaptive p-element techniques). However, nonlinear material analysis
will suffer from a similar problem as the adaptive p-element linear solution. High local stresses result from high
local strains. A nonlinear material analysis will try to resolve the stiffness at a singularity by adjusting the material
modulus as defined by its stress-strain relationship. Fictitiously high strains may cause additional nonlinear
iterations that should not have been required by the true strain state of the model. Hence stress singularities must be
avoided at all costs in nonlinear analyses.
944
Second Edition
6.3.21 Modelling Preload (Prestress)
Preloads or prestresses are applied to elements such as cables and bolted joints to incorporate the differential
stiffness within the calculations. Of course, the preload is also considered when performing stress recovery. A
minimum of 2 runs is required to be able to simulate the correct preload in a bolted joint, but only if there is to be
external loads applied to the system. If no external loads are to be applied, in say the simulation of bolt tightening,
then the analysis can be executed in one run, even for a materially nonlinear response, as long as you accept the
small displacement (geometrically linear) limitations of the method used. The preload applied to a bolted joint will
cause the bolt to stretch and the clamped component (called the abutment) to be compressed. How much the bolt
stretches and the abutment compresses depends on the relative stiffness of these two components. There are 3
methods for configuring the preload in MSC.NASTRAN, all with accompanying restrictions. These are the
temperature load method, the MPC constraint method and the GAP element method.
6.3.21.1 Temperature Load Method
This is the most general method and the only one that allows correct solution of a geometric nonlinear response. In
this method, a negative temperature "freezes" the bolt so it contracts. Obtaining the correct preload in linear
analysis requires 2 runs because you don't know the relative stiffnesses of the bolt and abutment. So you run once
with any negative value of temperature and look at how much the bolt stretched and how much preload it induced.
Now simply factor the temperature that freezes the bolt and re-run to obtain the correct preload. If the analysis is
nonlinear, and the bolt or abutment will change stiffness due to deformation, this method becomes tiresome
because you will need to iterate to find the correct preload as you try to follow the nonlinear force-displacement
curve of the bolted joint. In this case, it is better to use the MPC method described below to obtain the approximate
displacement of the bolt due to the preload. Of course, this will be limited by small displacement theory. Then you
can apply the temperature to obtain the displacement from this run. This method also presents problems when real
thermal loads are applied. Care must be taken to calculate a modified temperature for the bolt, which is now heated
or frozen for 2 reasons. If external loads are to be applied, apply them as usual.
6.3.21.2 MPC Constraint Method
MPC constraints in MSC.NASTRAN are subject to small displacement theory because the constraint direction is
not updated due to deformation of the structure. Consequently, if the analysis is geometrically nonlinear, then the
results may be inaccurate if the bolt direction changes significantly during analysis. Using beam elements with this
method requires that the bolt is split somewhere along its length and the two parts of the bolt connected together
with an RBE2 element in all directions except the axial direction. The axial direction of the two parts of the bolt is
connected with an MPC and a third point (an SPOINT) is used to apply the preload (using an SLOAD entry). The
displacement in the SPOINT from this run is recovered and used in a second run as the SPCD value to apply to the
MPC (the SLOAD is removed for this run). Alternatively, you can now use this displacement to calculate the
temperature to apply in a run similar to the one above. If external loads are to be applied, apply them as usual.
6.3.21.3 GAP Element Method
The GAP element is subject to the same small displacement theory as MPCs, except the axial direction may have
large displacement; large rotations are not supported. Again using beam elements with this method requires that the
bolt is split somewhere along its length and the two parts of the bolt connected together with an RBE2 element in
all directions except the axial direction. The axial direction of the two parts of the bolt is connected with a GAP
element and the F0 field of the PGAP entry is used to specify the preload. Once again, the displacement (now in the
GAP) from this run is recovered and used in a second run as the U0 value on the PGAP entry (F0 is left blank for
this run). If external loads are to be applied, apply them as usual. In the MPC and GAP cases, if you use SLOAD or
F0 respectively to load the bolted joint, this will give the correct behaviour as long as external loads are not applied.
Applying external loads without using SPCD or U0 causes the load in the bolt not to change when the external load
is applied; so 2 runs are needed to yield correct behaviour, but only when external loads are applied.
945
Second Edition
6.3.22 Modelling Symmetry
A structure that has one or two planes of symmetry (irrespective of loading) can be half or quarter modeled,
respectively. If the loads applied to the structure are symmetric relative to the plane of symmetry, then the full
model can be replaced with half the model by applying a symmetric boundary condition. On the other hand, if the
loads are antisymmetric, the same simplification can be achieved by applying the antisymmetric boundary
condition. A symmetric boundary condition implies that the displacements normal to the plane of symmetry and
rotations about the axes in the plane of symmetry are zero at the plane of symmetry. An antisymmetric boundary
condition implies that the displacements in the plane of symmetry and rotations normal to the plane of symmetry
are zero at the plane of symmetry. Even when the loading is not symmetric or antisymmetric about the structure’s
plane of symmetry, advantage can be taken of symmetry. This is because any general loading pattern can be broken
up into a combination of symmetric and antisymmetric loads relative to the plane of symmetry.
SUBCASE 1
LABEL = SYMMETRIC CONSTRAINTS-Y LOAD
SPC = 1
LOAD = 2
SUBCASE 2
LABEL = ANTISYMMETRIC CONSTRAINTS-Y LOAD
SPC = 2
LOAD = 2
SUBCOM 3
LABEL = LEFT SIDE OF MODEL-Y LOAD
SUBSEQ 1.0, 1.0
DISP=ALL
SUBCOM 4
LABEL = RIGHT SIDE OF MODEL-Y LOAD
SUBSEQ 1.0, -1.0
DISP=ALL
The structure above can be analyzed with the half

model but with 4 subcases. The first and second
subcases model the symmetric and antisymmetric
boundary conditions respectively, performing the
analysis on the left half of the model. The third
subcase combines the first and second subcases for
the total results of the left half of the model. Finally,
the fourth subcase computes the results of the right
half of the structure.
Symmetry modelling techniques are not

recommended in modal and subsequent dynamic
response analysis. Whilst a combination of
symmetry and anti-symmetry can be used to find all
the mode shapes, this combination is not feasible for
most dynamic studies. Also avoid symmetry in
buckling analysis. Symmetry is however a great idea
in nonlinear static analyses.
To apply symmetry conditions on a plane in a 3D model, all that is required is a set of translations SPCs in a
direction normal to the cut plane. This would avoid Poisson effects at the boundary since contraction is not
constrained in the plane of the cut, a scenario which will exist if all the nodes on the symmetry plane were
connected by a rigid element (RBE2 with all 6 DOFs constrained) to an independent node on the neutral axis on
which the 1D beam-like symmetry boundary conditions are applied. Symmetry conditions is different in elements
that use mathematical representation (or DOFs) for their missing spatial dimensions, such as shell and beam
models, where on top of the translation normal to the cut plane, the rotation about the two axes in the plane of the
cut must be constrained.
946
Second Edition
6.3.23 Multi-Point Constraints (MPC) 21
Single-point constraints refer to zero and non-zero essential boundary conditions being applied to a particular node
onto one or more of its DOFs. Single-point constraints with zero prescribed displacements are implemented by
reducing the global stiffness matrix to a reduced stiffness matrix that does not include the equations pertaining to
the constrained DOFs. In other words, within the static equilibrium equation [K]{U}={P}, the rows and columns
(hence also the associated DOFs in {U}) of [K] and the rows of {P} associated with the constrained DOFs are
eliminated. For non-zero prescribed displacements essential boundary conditions, the rows of [K] and {P}
associated with the non-zero constrained DOFs are eliminated and the prescribed values of the constrained DOFs
are included within the {U} vector. Of course, in a computer implementation, the global assembly procedure and
the reduction process will be intertwined for efficiency.
Multi-point constraints refer to constraints on multiple nodes. Three general methods of implementing multi-point
constraints are: -
A. Master-Slave Elimination Using Rigid Elements with Case Control Command RIGID = LINEAR.
The degrees of freedom involved in each MFC are separated into master and slave freedoms. The slave
freedoms are then explicitly eliminated. The modified equations do not contain the slave freedoms.
B. Penalty Augmentation Using CGAP Elements. Also called the penalty function method. Each MFC is
viewed as the presence of a fictitious elastic structural element called penalty element that enforces it
approximately. This element is parametrized by a numerical weight, w on the stiffness. The exact constraint
is recovered if the weight, w goes to infinity. In other words, we are simply adding an appropriately stiff
element between the constrained DOFs in order to simulate a constrained connection. The MFCs are
imposed by augmenting the finite element model with the penalty elements. The theory behind using this
method to simulate general non-zero constraints is described within Courant penalty functions.
C. Lagrange Multiplier Adjunction Using Rigid Elements with Case Control Command RIGID =
LAGR (also RIGID = LGELIM). For each MFC an additional unknown is adjoined to the master
stiffness equations. Physically this set of unknowns represent constraint forces that would enforce the
constraints exactly should there be applied to the unconstrained system.
The master-slave elimination method is clearly the exact method of implementing multi-point constraints.
However, the algorithm requires that dependent (slave) DOFs not be dependent upon more than one master DOF.
The method also requires rearranging the equilibrium equations and hence is more computationally intensive.
Nonlinear constraints are even more difficult to implement.
The penalty function method on the other hand, adds an appropriately stiff element between the DOFs in order to
simulate the correct prescribed displacement between them. For a zero displacement constraint, such as a rigid link,
we would want the stiffness of the element to be as high as numerically possible. But unfortunately, the higher the
ratio of the stiffness of the rigid link to the structure elements the more ill-conditioned the stiffness matrix will be.
Obviously we have two effects at odds with each other. Making w larger reduces the constraint violation error but
increases the solution error. The best w is that which makes both errors roughly equal in absolute value. This
tradeoff value is difficult to find aside of systematically running numerical experiments. In practice the heuristic
square root rule is often followed. This rule can be stated as follows. Suppose that the largest stiffness coefficient,
before adding penalty elements, is of the order of 10k and that the working machine precision is p digits. Then
choose penalty weights to be of order 10k+p/2 with the proviso that such a choice would not cause arithmetic
overflow. The name “square root” arises because the recommended w is in fact 10k(10p)1/2. Thus it is seen that the
choice of penalty weight by this rule involves knowledge of both stiffness magnitudes and floating-point hardware
properties of the computer used. The penalty function method is less computationally intensive. There is no master-
21
FELIPPA, Carlos A. Introduction to Finite Element Methods. University of Colorado, 2001.
947
Second Edition
slave interdependence and hence there is no restrictions on dependent DOFs unlike the master-slave elimination
method. The penalty function method can also be readily used to implemented nonlinear constraints. The main
disadvantage, however, is a serious one; the choice of weight values that balance solution accuracy with the
violation of constraint conditions. For simple cases the square root rule mentioned previously often works, although
effective use calls for knowledge of the magnitude of stiffness coefficients. Such knowledge may be difficult to
extract from a general-purpose “black box” program. For complex cases selection of appropriate weights may
require extensive numerical experimentation, wasting the user time with numerical games that have no bearing on
the real objective, which is getting a solution. The deterioration of the condition number of the penalty-augmented
stiffness matrix can have an even more serious side effect in some solution procedures such as eigenvalue
extraction or iterative solvers. Finally, even if optimal weights are selected, the combined solution error cannot be
lowered beyond a threshold value.
The Lagrange Multiplier Adjunction method enforces the multi-point constraints by specifying appropriate forces
at the associated DOFs. Since there forces or Lagrange multipliers λ are unknown before the solution is made, they
are appended to the vector of original unknowns {U} by the process called adjuntion. The modified stiffness matrix
is thus called the (multiplier-augmented) bordered stiffness matrix. This is solved for all the unknowns including
the multiplier. In contrast to the penalty method, the method of Lagrange multipliers has the advantage of being
exact (aside from computation errors). It provides directly the constraint forces, which are of interest in many
applications. It does not require any guesses as regards weights. As the penalty method, it can be extended without
difficulty to nonlinear constraints. It is not free of disadvantages. It introduces additional unknowns, requiring
expansion of the original stiffness method. It renders the augmented stiffness matrix indefinite (i.e. no longer
positive definite), a property that may cause grief with some solution methods such as Cholesky factorization or
conjugate gradients. Finally, as the master-slave method, it is sensitive to the degree of linear independence of the
constraints i.e. a DOF cannot be dependent upon more than one independent DOF. On the whole the Lagrangian
multiplier method appear to be the most elegant for a general-purpose finite element program that is supposed to
work as a “black box” by minimizing guesses and choices from its users. Its implementation, however, is not
simple. Special care must be exercised to detect singularities due to constraint dependency and to account for the
effect of loss of positive definiteness of the bordered stiffness on equation solvers.
Master-Slave Penalty Lagrange

Elimination Function Multiplier
Generality Fair Excellent Excellent
Ease of implementation Poor to fair Good Fair
Sensitivity to user decisions High High Slight
Accuracy Variable Mediocre Excellent
Sensitivity as regards to constraint
High None High
dependence
Retains positive definiteness Yes Yes No
Modification of DOF vector required Yes No Yes
948
Second Edition
6.3.24 Model Checkout
6.3.24.1 Grid Point Singularities (AUTOSPC, EPZERO, K6ROT, SNORM)
6.3.24.1.1 AUTOSPC and EPZERO
Grid point singularity is identified by considering the stiffness at each single node (contrast with mechanism type
singularity which considers stiffness at more than one grid point). Since NASTRAN is primarily an implicit code,
there is a need to remove DOFs with low or zero stiffness to avoid the stiffness matrix from becoming singular.
The stiffness (and mass for that matter) in every DOF on a grid is provided by elements. CELAS elements provide
axial stiffness only. CROD elements provide axial and torsional stiffness, but not torsional inertia. CBAR elements
provide axial, torsional, bending, and shear stiffnesses but do not provide torsional inertia. Shells provide stiffness
in all DOFs except for in the in-plane rotational DOF. Solids provide stiffness in only the 3 translational DOFs. If a
DOF of a grid is unconstrained or if there is no contribution of stiffness from any element, then it has no stiffness
and hence is singular, in which case an SPC must be automatically added using AUTOSPC.
AUTOSPC scans the stiffness of the 6 DOFs at each grid. The stiffness ratio is the ratio of stiffness in the weakest
direction to that in the strongest direction, considering all possible directions rather than just the coordinate
direction. Translational and rotational stiffnesses are considered separately. NASTRAN then compares the
STIFFNESS RATIOS with a failure criterion, to decide whether the DOF is singular and an SPC should be applied.
At each grid, a 3 x 3 partition of the stiffness matrix for each of the three translational and three rotational DOFs is
solved as an eigenvalue problem to determine the principal stiffnesses. Each stiffness term is compared to the
principal stiffness using the formula
where Kii is the term in the i-th row and i-th column of the matrix and Kmax is the principal stiffness. If ε is less
than the value of PARAM, EPZERO, the global direction nearest i is considered singular. The default value for
EPZERO is 10–8, but this can be adjusted using EPZERO, although this should be changed with great care.
The default AUTOSPC is YES is all solution schemes except for SOL 106 and SOL 129.
PARAM, AUTOSPC, YES

PARAM, EPZERO, < Value 1.0E-8 by default >
In a CBAR assemblage with all the stiffness (axial, torsion, bending in 2 directions and optionally shear in 2
directions) properties specified, no AUTOSPC is required as there are 6 stiffness contributions to every DOF. In
CBAR assemblage with missing stiffness properties or likewise in CROD assemblages, certain DOFs may have to
be suppressed as there may be no stiffness contribution. In the limit, if a single DOF spring solitarily connects a
node, all other DOFs of the node will be constrained except for the DOF in which the spring acts. Likewise,
rotational DOFs of solids and in-plane rotational DOFs of shells are constrained. Solids have no rotational DOFs
and shells do not have in plane rotational DOFs. This is because of the nature of shells providing in plane rotational
stiffness through the in plane translational stiffnesses of many elements within the surface mesh and solids
providing rotational stiffness about the three axes through the translational stiffnesses of many elements within the
volume mesh.
949
Second Edition
The DOFs constrained by the program must be checked, since over-constraining can cause incorrect results.
The potentiality of over-constraining is usually associated with 1D elements. Constraining the in-plane
rotational DOFs of shells and all 3 rotational DOFs of solids do not generally over-constrain the model as the
rotational stiffnesses (and associated deformations) in 2D and 3D elements, by their very nature, are
provided by the stiffness of the many translational DOFs.
The potentiality of over-constraining a finite element model consisting of 1D elements shall be investigated
thoroughly. To this end, it is crucial to know the nature of the load path in the structure being modeled. All applied
loads must be balanced ultimately by the reactions through certain types of effects (which appear as internal forces
and stresses) within the structure. There are 4 ways of carrying load, namely in axial force, in torsion, in bending
moment and in shear force. These lead to deformations. An axial force causes axial deformation, torsion causes
torsional deformation, bending moments cause bending deformations and shear forces cause shear deformations. If
it is envisaged that a particular load path does not involve significant bending moment and shear force, that
load path can be modeled with a CROD element. (Note that CBAR elements become CROD elements if both
ends are pinned in bending rotations (not torsional) or if a very small value of bending stiffness is inputted such that
the bending moment becomes very small. A pinned ended beam element is akin to having a zero-length rigid link
between the connecting members in all the DOFs except the rotational DOF that corresponds to the bending
moment). The main nature of the load path on outrigger columns on a sky-scrapper is in axial force. CROD
elements may be sufficient in this case. The same argument applies for using CROD elements to model a truss
where the load path is primarily axial in nature. However, CROD elements or pin-ended CBAR elements provide
no rotational stiffness to the DOFs. To avoid a singular matrix, these DOFs are artificially constrained using
AUTOSPC. The user must then ensure that these lost loads into these artificial constraints are small enough to be
ignored. The applied loads are no longer totally balanced by the actual support reactions, but some energy is lost
into the artificial constraints. If the load path is primarily axial, the loads lost into these artificial constraints will be
small. But if a significant force is lost into the artificial constraint, the model is deemed to be over-
constrained. The load path is not primarily axial in nature. CROD elements should hence not be used to model a
load path where there are significant bending and shear actions as there will be no bending stiffness to transfer the
loads. This will cause a mechanism (singular matrix) to occur unless an automatic constraint is placed by
AUTOSPC. If however, CBAR elements are used with bending stiffness contribution in the outrigger and the truss
examples, the potentiality of there being some bending action is accounted for, just in case. It will of course be
observed that the bending moments and shear forces in the outriggers and the truss CBAR elements to be small if
the load path is primarily axial in nature. No singularities exist when CBAR elements (with axial, torsion, bending
and optionally shear stiffnesses) are used. Akin to the outrigger and truss examples, applying a concentrated
moment on a cable in reality will result in a mechanism. That is to say, applying a concentrated moment about the
common grid adjoining two collinear CROD elements will be futile, as the DOF will be constrained by AUTOSPC,
as it has no stiffness to resist the moment. The moment load is lost into the constraint, again because the anticipated
load path was not modeled by the element. If however, a CBAR element of very low stiffness is added to the grid,
such that AUTOSPC does not constrain the DOF, the application of the concentrated moment will cause the
displacements to be very large, as the resistance is very low. Likewise, torsional stiffness in CBAR elements can
often be ignored if there is deemed to be little torsional forces i.e. that torsion is an insignificant load path. If a DOF
has no torsional stiffness component, then the DOF component will be automatically constrained by the code. But
if a torsion load path is intended, the torsion will be lost into the artificial constraint, making the structure
incorrectly too stiff. If on the other hand, the stiffness in that DOF component is not too small in comparison with
the other DOFs in that particular grid such that AUTOSPC is not invoked, the torsional forces will cause large
torsional deformations within the element. To conclude, if a DOF is without stiffness and is not constrained by
the user, then a grid point singularity will exist unless the code enforces an artificial restraint by AUTOSPC.
If the DOF is part of a critical load path, then loads will be lost into the artificial constraint instead of being
carried by the action of the structural elements and ultimately being transferred into the real supports. If
instead the DOF has a low stiffness, but not low enough to be constrained by AUTOSPC, then the matrix
will not be singular (although likely to be quite ill-conditioned depending on the precision of the machine),
but the applied loads will cause a large deflection as the resistance is low.
950
Second Edition
6.3.24.1.2 K6ROT and SNORM
For linear solutions (i.e. all except SOL 106 and SOL 129), the default K6ROT is 0.0, whilst for nonlinear
analysis the default is 100.0 (this is opposite to the defaults for AUTOSPC). K6ROT is intended primarily
for geometric nonlinear analysis. For highly nonlinear solutions a value of 1.E5 has been used successfully.
NASTRAN internally inspects an appropriate rotational stiffness value to be applied, this value is then multiplied
by K6ROT. For most instances, the default is appropriate. There may be instances where K6ROT is beneficial in
linear analysis. Shell elements do not have stiffness in rotation about an axis normal to the shell. In models
consisting of thousands of shell without reinforcement (e.g. car models) this can produce a very long list of
singularities, making checking tedious. This may be solved with K6ROT, which removes the singularity (and
prevents AUTOSPC) by specifying a small value of stiffness in the rotational degree of freedom. In other words, a
grounded in-plane rotational spring is inserted to remove the singularity. Secondly, for linear analysis, if a surface
is flat, then there is no reason why we cannot allow AUTOSPC to automatically constraint the in-plane rotational
freedoms. If however, the surface is only slightly curved (say 179° between adjacent shell elements), then letting
AUTOSPC constrain the freedoms may be unacceptable, as the model may not pass the rigid body checks
(GROUNDCHECK). In this case, K6ROT with a value of 1.0 may be deemed appropriate.
PARAM, K6ROT, < 0.0 to 100.0 >
In linear analysis, instead of using K6ROT, it is better to use PARAM, SNORM. By default, the direction of
the normal rotation vector for flat plate elements is assumed to be perpendicular to the plane of each element. If the
model is curved, the shell bending and twist moments must change direction at the element intersection. If
transverse shear flexibility is present, the deformations may be too large. (Because elements using low-order
formulations ignore the edge effect, this rarely causes any problems-a large value of the parameter K6ROT
partially cures the problem). With the unique normal (SNORM) option, the rotational degrees of freedom at each
corner of an element are measured relative to the specified normal vector direction. Thus, all elements connected to
a grid point will use a consistent direction for defining shell bending and twisting moments. Shell normals are
available for CQUAD4, CQUADR, CTRIA3, and CTRIAR elements. Normals are activated if the actual angle
between the local element normal and the unique grid point normal is less than 20.0°, the default value. The default
can be changed by setting SNORM to the desired real value up to 89°. The unique grid point normal is the average
of all local shell element normals at a specific grid point. Generated grid point normals may be overwritten by user-
defined normals. A shell normal defines a unique direction for the rotational degrees of freedom of all adjacent
elements. A shell normal vector is created by averaging the normal vectors of the attached elements. If the actual
angle is greater than the value defined on PARAM, SNORM, (default = 20.0) the edge is assumed to be a corner,
and the old method is used. Shell normals improve the accuracy of the results in curved shells where in-plane
shear and twisting moments act together. The type of structure that exhibits the most change in results is a thick
curved shell with large in-plane shear forces and twisting moments. Most other problems, such as flat plates and
curved shells with pressure loads, show changes in results of less than 1%. More degrees of freedom may be
constrained using this improved formulation. This formulation results in zero in-plane rotational stiffness values.
The CQUAD8 and CTRIA6 elements are not included in the shell normal processing. If they are modeled
correctly, they do not require shell normal processing. Connecting these elements to the lower-order flat elements is
not recommended. Transverse shear flexibility (MID3 on the PSHELL property entry) should be left on when
normals are used.
PARAM, SNORM, 20.0 $ Default value is 20.0
In linear solutions, PARAM, K6ROT, 0.0 and PARAM, SNORM, 20.0 are recommended. Transverse shear
flexibility (MID3 of PSHELL) should be included. AUTOSPC should also be switched on (as is the default in
linear analysis). K6ROT can be used in linear analysis to reduce the output in the Grid Point Singularity
Table due to AUTOSPC, simply for ease of checking the automatic constraint DOFs normally more critical
for 1D elements. It can also be used with a value of 1.0 in linear analysis when the shell surface is only
slightly curved. However, K6ROT with values of around 100.0 is intended primarily for nonlinear analysis.
951
Second Edition
6.3.24.2 Mechanism Singularity of Stiffness Matrix (MAXRATIO, BAILOUT)
A mechanism type singularity requires the consideration of stiffness at more than one grid point (contrast with grid
point singularity which considers stiffness at each grid). MAXRATIO checks for
I. global mechanism singularity, and for
II. local mechanisms singularity
within the system. AUTOSPC may have accounted for all the local grid point singularities (of beam grids without
certain stiffness properties, in plane rotational freedom of shell grids and all rotational freedoms of solid grids), but
it remains to be seen if the system is restrained globally from rigid body motion or if there are local mechanisms.
Mathematically, a mechanism type singularity is detected during decomposition, based on the maximum ratio of
the matrix diagonal to the factor diagonal
Log10 MAXRATIO indicates how many significant digits

may have been lost during the decomposition.
where Kii is the i-th diagonal term of the original stiffness matrix and Dii is the i-th diagonal term of the factor
diagonal matrix. Note that for a symmetric matrix K it can be represented as
If for any row i, this ratio is greater then MAXRATIO, then the matrix will be considered nearly singular (having
mechanisms). If any diagonal terms of the factor are negative, the stiffness matrix will be implausible (non-positive
definite). The exact grid point failing the criteria is not significant for the global rigid-body mechanisms and
may change with small changes in the model; The exact grid point failing the criteria is significant for the
local mechanism. NASTRAN then takes appropriate action depending on the BAILOUT parameter. If negative,
NASTRAN is directed to continue processing. PARAM, BAILOUT should really therefore NOT BE USED (it
should be specified 0 to terminate the analysis if near singularities are detected), instead of failing the
MAXRATIO, the modelling should be corrected.
$ BULK DATA
PARAM, MAXRATIO, < Value 1.0E5 by default >
PARAM, BAILOUT, < 0 or –1 >
Should be positive and

less than 1.0E5
First, consider the global mechanism. For a fully coupled structure, there can be 6 global rigid body motions,
which must all be constrained. Non fully coupled portions of the structure exhibiting rigid body motion can also
be regarded as a global mechanism. Translational rigid body motion can be constrained by the user applying the 3
DOF translational constraints at a particular grid or at multiple grids (of course not all 3 DOF constraints need to be
applied at the very same grid, so long as the structure cannot exhibit rigid body translation on the whole). As for
rotational rigid body motion, the manner in which constraints need to be applied to restrain the rigid body modes
depend on the type of model, whether beams, shells or solids. Beam models can be completely restrained against
rotational rigid body motion by applying the 3 rotational DOF constraints at any one grid. Shell models can be
restrained against the 2 out-of-plane rotational rigid body motion by applying the 2 rotational DOF constraints at
any one grid. However, the in plane rotational rigid body motion CANNOT BE constrained by applying a in-plane
rotation restraint at a grid or multiple grids (as AUTOSPC does) because individual shell elements do not have any
952
Second Edition
in-plane rotational stiffness in general. But of course, the shell mesh as a whole does have in plane rotational
stiffness. Thus, the in plane rotational rigid body motion can only be suppressed by a set of translational DOFs in
the two directions in the plane of the shells applied at different grids. Alternatively, a set of grids can be connected
to a grid with an RBE2, which is then suppressed in its rotational freedoms. Likewise, with solid models, all 3
rotational rigid body motions CANNOT BE suppressed by applying rotational DOF constraints at a grid or
multiple grids (as AUTOSPC does) because individual solid elements have not any rotational stiffness. But of
course, the solid mesh as a whole does have rotational stiffnesses about the 3 axes. These are suppressed by a set of
translational DOFs in the three directions applied at different grids. Alternatively, a set of grids can be connected to
a grid with an RBE2, which is then suppressed in its rotational freedoms. On all three type of models, be it beam,
shell or solid models, a set of translational DOF constraints in the 3 directions applied at different grids will act to
constrain the rotational rigid body motion. It must be remembered of course, that these application of constraints
will act to alter the behaviour of the model and hence should be representative of reality.
Second, consider local mechanisms. Local mechanisms refer to individual finite elements. Local mechanisms
occur when an element if not properly connected to the main structure. That is to say, its stiffnesses are not fully
coupled into the main structure. It is best to illustrate with examples. A local mechanism will exist if a CBAR or
CBEAM has no torsional stiffness whilst its adjacent collinear beams have torsional stiffness. The local beam may
exhibit rigid body motion, as the torsional stiffness (and hence the ability to prevent the spinning about the axis) of
the element is not attached onto the main structure. This would not be prevented by AUTOSPC because there is a
stiffness contribution to the torsional DOF from the adjacent elements. A local mechanism also occurs when a
CBAR or CBEAM is pinned in all three rotational DOFs on both ends, irrespective of whether it is collinear of not
with adjacent beams. Note that to model trusses, only the two bending rotational DOFs are released, not the
torsional DOF. This is perfectly acceptable. Likewise, pinned ended (in the two bending rotation DOFs) beams on
multi-storey buildings can be used so long as the torsional DOF is not also released. But if the torsional stiffness
was forgotten on either the truss or the multi-storey building, then the beam can spin about its axis. This also occurs
when all 3 rotation DOFs of the two ends of the beam are released. The about-axis rotation motion of the beam is
not connected onto the main structure and hence is a local mechanism. This would not be prevented by AUTOSPC
because there are contributions to the rotational stiffness from adjacent elements, which are not pinned ended.
Next, a local mechanism can occur if shells elements without bending properties (MID2 on PSHELL) are used.
This however may be prevented by AUTOSPC. A local mechanism can also occur if a CBAR or CBEAM element
connects into shells elements without special modelling techniques to transfer the in-plane (of the shell) moment.
Hence if a 1D element connects to the surface of the shell mesh, there is no coupling of the in-plane rotational
stiffness, and hence the 1D element is a mechanism as it can spin about the axis normal to the shell surface. This
would not be prevented by AUTOSPC as the beam provides the rotational stiffness. An RBE2 or RBE3 connection
should instead be employed. A local mechanism also occurs when a CBAR or CBEAM connects onto one grid of a
solid mesh, even if the other end of the CBAR or CBEAM is also connected onto the solid mesh. Again there is
nothing to stop the beam from spinning about its axis as the rotational motion is not coupled into the solid mesh.
This would not be prevented by AUTOSPC as the beam provides the 3 rotational stiffnesses. An RBE2 or RBE3
connection should be employed. Next, a local mechanism occurs also when a shell mesh is connected into a solid
mesh without proper modelling techniques to connect the out-of-plane (of the shell) rotational stiffnesses. This
would not be prevented by AUTOSPC as the shell mesh provides the out-of-plane (of the shell) rotational
stiffnesses.
Global mechanisms are best pin-pointed by running a SOL 103 (with AUTOSPC possibly set to the non-
default value of NO) and visually inspecting the modes of vibration that have zero (or close to zero)
frequency. This will highlight the global rigid body motion of the entire structure and also the non fully
coupled portions of the structure as mechanisms. Local mechanisms on the other hand will cause a SOL 103
to crash and the DOFs with a critical MAXRATIO will be presented in the .f06 file for inspection and
subsequent attention.
953
Second Edition
6.3.24.3 Grid Point Singularities (AUTOSPC, K6ROT) and Local and Global Mechanism Singularity
(MAXRATIO, BAILOUT) for Linear, Nonlinear, Static and Dynamic Solutions
Grid Point
Solution Local and Global Mechanism Singularity
Singularity
Local mechanisms (identified with critical MAXRATIOs)
may cause the solution scheme to crash, failing which the
results would be suspect. Global mechanisms cannot be
Linear static SOL 101 AUTOSPC, YES
modeled, the structure must be at least statically determinate
Linear buckling SOL 105 K6ROT, 0.0.
by applying sufficient zero or prescribed displacement
boundary conditions. Local and global mechanisms show up
as critical MAXRATIOs.
may cause the solution scheme to diverge, failing which the
results would be suspect. Global mechanisms (identified by a
AUTOSPC, NO SOL 103 with AUTOSPC possibly NO) cannot be modeled
Nonlinear static SOL 106
K6ROT, 100.0 because convergence to a static equilibrium state can never be
achieved, hence all parts of the structure must be at least
statically determinate by applying sufficient zero or prescribed
displacement boundary conditions.
results would be suspect. Global mechanisms can be modeled
AUTOSPC, YES
Linear modal SOL 103 (possibly with having to set AUTOSPC to the non-default
K6ROT, 0.0.
value of NO), showing up as zero frequency modes.
Intentional or unintentional global mechanisms can be readily
visible, inspected and attended to.
Linear dynamic SOL 109, as long as the unrestrained degree of freedom has defined
AUTOSPC, YES
SOL 112, SOL 108, SOL mass terms. Note that since the analysis is linear, the stiffness
K6ROT, 0.0.
111 and damping is based on the initial undeflected geometry.
Must eliminate unintentional global mechanisms, otherwise
the mechanism will continue vibrating, possibly inducing
incorrect results.
may cause the solution scheme to diverge, failing which the
Nonlinear dynamic AUTOSPC, NO
as long as the unrestrained degree of freedom has defined
(implicit) SOL 129 K6ROT, 100.0.
mass terms. Must eliminate unintentional global
mechanisms, otherwise the mechanism will continue
vibrating, possibly inducing incorrect results.
Local mechanisms will introduce errors. Global mechanisms
can be modeled as long as the unrestrained degree of freedom
Nonlinear dynamic
None has defined mass terms. Must eliminate unintentional global
(explicit) LS-DYNA
mechanisms, otherwise the mechanism will continue
vibrating, possibly inducing incorrect results.
954
Second Edition
6.3.24.4 Ill-Conditioning of Stiffness Matrix (EPSILON, Load and Reaction Discrepancy PRTRESLT)
Singularities occur when there is no stiffness (or very low stiffness) in a DOF component relative to other DOF
components at a particular node. The contribution of stiffness may come from any element. The relative
contribution of the adjacent elements is immaterial. On the other hand, ill-conditioning occurs when the relative
stiffness contribution in a particular DOF component at a node from adjacent elements is large. For illustration,
take an example of two springs in series of stiffness k1 and k2. Assume k2 >> k1.
k1 k2 F
Two equations can be written for this 2-DOF system, namely

(k1 + k2) u1 + (−k2) u2 = 0
(−k2) u1 + (k2) u2 = F
which can be solved simultaneous for the two displacement unknowns. Getting rid of u2 from the two equations
without performing any arithmetic, the displacement for u1 is obtained as
u1 = F / (k1 + k2 − k2 )
Now if k2 >> k1 then there will be error e = k2 − k2 (not zero due to numerical inaccuracy) introduced in the
calculation of u1. And because the value of the second k2 is large compared to k1, e would be comparable in
magnitude to k1. Subsequently, the force in the first element will be calculated as
f1 = k1 u1 = F k1 / (k1 + e)
when in reality it should be
f1 = k1 u1 = F
Hence, ill-conditioning occurs when there is large differences in stiffness between adjacent DOF components at a
particular grid point. A definite indication of ill-conditioning is when the sum of loading at a particular load due to
explicit nodal loads and also equivalent element loads is not equal the sum of the element end forces for all the
elements connected to that particular node. Codes generally perform an out-of-balance check to detect ill-
conditioned matrices. In MSC.NASRAN, the condition of overall stiffness matrix is ascertained using EPSILON in
the .f06 file. If all the stiffness terms in the matrix are of the same order of magnitude then the numerical
calculations carried out NASTRAN on the matrix are easy. However, if there are very large differences between
the largest and smallest stiffness terms then the accuracy of the analysis will be impaired due to limitations of
computer numerical accuracy. The matrix is then considered to ill-conditioned. EPSILON is based on a strain
energy error ratio. The EPSILON value should theoretically be equal to zero, but due to computer accuracy
limitations it usually in the order of 10-7 to 10-8. Large values indicate that the stiffness matrix is ill-conditioned. A
system of linear equations is said to be ill-conditioned if small perturbations in the system lead to large changes in
the solution. NASTRAN checks for evidence of ill-conditioning in the system of equations representing the
structural model. An EPSILON value of 1 would indicate that parts of the model are disconnected, or that there is a
mechanism in the structure. Hence an EPSILON value of 1 would be obtained if the model fails the MAXRATIO
check, i.e. the global singularity (rigid body motion) or local mechanism check.
The upper limit for EPSILON is a matter of judgment. Usually, analyses producing EPSILON values below 10-9
are considered acceptable. A large value of epsilon (greater than about 10-3) is an indication of numerical ill-
conditioning and requires further investigation. It does not matter whether epsilon is positive or negative, as long as
it is small. In addition, a value of, say, 10-12 is not a "better" value than 10-10; both are "small enough".
After decomposition, a singularity may lead to an incorrect solution. In static analysis, MSC.NASTRAN solves
to obtain u (displacements). Using these displacements, a “residual” loading vector is calculated as follows:
955
Second Edition
This residual vector should theoretically be null but may not be null due to numeric roundoff. To obtain a
normalized value of the residual loading, an error measure EPSILON is calculated by
Alternatively, ill-conditioning can be ascertained by inspecting the discrepancy between the applied forces and
reactions. The following PRTRESLT parameter prints the resultant of the applied loads (OLOAD
RESULTANTS), the resultant of the restraints (SPCFORCE RESULTANTS and MPCFORCE RESULTANTS) all
about the point specified by PARAM, GRDPRT, N, the default being the origin of the basic coordinate system.
$ BULK DATA
PARAM, PRTRESLT, YES
The EQUILIBRIUM Case Control Command can also be used to perform the equilibrium balance check.
To conclude, ill-conditioning indicated by high values of EPSILON is caused by a high difference in stiffness
between adjacent elements in the model (the solution of which would obviously be to use rigid elements such
as RBE2 connecting the corresponding stiffness to model the much stiffer element) and by large mass in
dynamic analysis whilst ill-conditioning indicated by an EPSILON value of 1.0 is caused when the model
fails the MAXRATIO check, i.e. the global singularity (rigid body motion) or local mechanism check.
956
Second Edition
6.3.24.5 Grid Point Weight Generator
The total mass and inertia of the model can be checked by specifying the GRDPNT, N parameter with respect to
the grid point N, a value of N = 0 denoting the origin of the model coordinate frame being used.
$ BULK DATA
PARAM, GRDPNT, < 0 for about origin or specify a Grid ID >
6.3.24.6 Displacement Compatibility Check
Displacement compatibility refers the fact that the displacement shape functions are continuous between adjacent
elements. For instance, the corner and mod-side nodes of adjacent elements must be connected and so a mesh
transition is required for a mesh of linear elements to mesh into parabolic elements. To ensure displacement
compatibility between adjacent elements, a preprocessor should be used to perform a visual inspection on a shrink
plot of all the elements from their nodes. Missing elements may be detected visually.
More effectively, the pre-processor should be used to plot the free ends (1d mesh), free edges (2d mesh) and free
faces (for 3D mesh) of the model. Unintentional holes and incompatibility within the model will clearly show up in
the display. A real modal analysis (assuming mass correctly incorporated) can also be performed to ensure that all
parts of the model are properly connected. Or, a 1g i.e. gravity load static analysis in the 3 directions (in 3 separate
subcases) can be performed (assuming mass correctly incorporated) to check for displacement incompatibilities.
To zip up the unconnected grids that are coincident (to a tolerance applicable to model), the equivalence function
of the pre-processor may be used. However, ensure that intentional coincident grids that model scalar stiffness,
scalar damping or hinges are not equivalenced.
957
Second Edition
6.3.24.7 Element Quality Checks
It has been mentioned that the benefits of isoparametric element formulations is that curved geometries can be
mapped more accurately because the geometry is also described by the shape functions. However, the geometry
must not be too distorted, whether in its initial undeflected configuration or at a later stage of a nonlinear analysis.
The parameter that suffers from badly distorted configurations is the Jacobian | J |. The Jacobian maps the natural
coordinates to the global coordinates in the stiffness expression of the elements. Element distortions generally stem
from excessive variations in the Jacobian between different nodes. Codes tend to (based on experience) place
bounds on the permissible variation of the Jacobian over a particular element between different nodes. Re-entrant
angles (where the corner node of a QUAD8 is squeezed into the element beyond the mid-point must be avoided as
the will cause the Jacobian to change sign. As the corner node approaches the mid-point, | J | 0, causing infinite
strains. Even in an undistorted QUAD8, if the mid-side node were beyond the middle third, this would cause the
Jacobian to vanish at a certain node and hence again produce infinite strains. There are four possible forms of
element distortion, namely: -
(i) Aspect ratio distortion
(ii) Angular distortion, i.e. skew and taper
(iii) Volumetric distortion
(iv) Mid node position distortion
All these distortions can be quantified as some terms in the Jacobian going to zero, causing a numerical singularity
arising solely from the mapping function. It can lead to large errors in the stress results but has a lesser effect on the
computed displacements. These numerical singularities have been used in elements modelling cracks. The default
element quality checks in MSC.NASTRAN are presented as follows. If any of these are violated, then the analysis
will crash. The following are the default MSC.NASTRAN element quality values which should be ensured within
the pre-processor. A few of these default values can be changed using the GEOMCHECK Executive command.
Evaluates location
of mid-side nodes
The results are printed under

USER INFORMATION
MESSAGE 7555.
958
Second Edition
6.3.24.8 Maximum Values
The summary of maximum displacements, loads and SPCs and MPCs all in the basic coordinate system can be
requested using the following parameter.
$ BULK DATA
PARAM, PRTMAXIM, YES
Subcase Number
6.3.24.9 Element Orientation Check
The element X-, Y- and Z- orientation for beams must be consistent as stress recovery is presented in the element
coordinate system, the Z-normal for shells must be consistent but the element X- and Y- orientation can be
random as long as the stress recovery is presented in the global coordinate system, and for solids a random X-, Y-
and Z- element orientation is fine as long as the stress recovery is presented in the global coordinate system.
6.3.24.10 Duplicate Grid and Element Check
A pre-processor should be equipped with the ability to detect duplicate grids or elements, be it beams, shells or
solids, as visual inspection is impossible. Unintentional duplicate grids occur when an equivalence operation was
forgotten. Duplicate grids may however be intentional for the modelling of scalar elements CELAS, CBUSH or
rigid elements RBE2. Duplicate elements may occur if a line, surface or volume was accidentally meshed more
than once.
6.3.24.11 Element Summary Table
The ELSUM Case Control command provides a quick summary table of properties for the elements in the model.
These properties include element-id, material-id, length (or thickness), area, volume, structural mass, non-structural
mass, total mass, and weight (weight mass * total mass).
959
Second Edition
6.3.24.12 Unconstrained Equilibrium Check (Grounding Check)
6.3.24.12.1 Enforced Displacement Method
This is a superb method of evaluating some modelling errors that cause unintentional grounding of the structure. If
a structure is truly unconstrained, then movement at one point of this structure should cause the whole structure to
move as a rigid body. The following procedure can be used to perform this check.
1. Remove all the constraints
2. Apply a unit enforced displacement in the x-direction at one selected grid point while constraining the
other five components at this selected grid point to zero. This grid point should be close to the center of
gravity of the structure, although not a requirement. The x-displacements at all the other grid points should
also be equal to unity if the structure is truly unconstrained. If the displacement at a certain grid point is not
equal to unity in the x-direction, it is very likely that it overstrained. The likely causes for this can include
incorrect modelling of rigid elements, offset beams, non-collinear CELASi.
3. Repeat the same procedure for the other two orthogonal directions.
At the conclusion of this check, you should remember to put your original constraints back into your model.
6.3.24.12.2 Automated Rigid Body Method
In addition enforced displacement method, you may also request a more robust and more automatic grounding
check of the stiffness matrix. This grounding check is also referred to as rigid body check because the stiffness
matrix is multiplied by the rigid body transformation matrix. The grounding check identifies unintentional
constraints and ill conditioning in the stiffness matrix. Automatic grounding check is requested using the
GROUNDCHECK Case Control command.
For example, the following command GROUNDCHECK = YES will request a grounding check of the g-set. The
following command GROUNDCHECK(SET=ALL) = YES will request a grounding check of all DOF sets. The
check may be performed at any or all stages of the stiffness reduction based on the specification of the SET
keyword.
User Information Message 7570 is
issued by GROUNDCHECK for
each DOF set requested. The strain
energy is computed in each direction
of the rigid body motion and by
default, if the strain energy exceeds
the tolerance, then “FAIL” is printed
out for that directory. The tolerance
is set by dividing the largest stiffness
term by 1.E10.
The THRESH keyword specifies the maximum strain energy that passes the grounding check. DATAREC=YES
requests data recovery of grounding forces. The RTHRESH=r keyword prints the grounding forces larger than r
percent of the largest grounding force if DATAREC is set to YES.
960
Second Edition
Here is an example for the g-set that indicates the stiffness matrix passes the grounding check in all six rigid body
directions.
Here is an example for the f-set that indicates the stiffness matrix fails the grounding check in all six rigid body
directions.
If the DATAREC keyword is specified and the rigid body check fails then data recovery will be performed to
compute and print the grounding forces to make it easy to locate the source of the failure. By default, only those
grounding forces larger than 10 percent of the largest grounding force will be printed (see RTHRESH keyword).
Here is an example of grounding forces created by moving the model in rigid body direction 1 associated with the
f-set failure shown above.
6.3.24.12.3 Thermal Equilibrium Method
Check against grounding is especially necessary if the structure is subjected to thermal loading. The thermal
equilibrium method can actually be used to check against grounding as follows.
1. Remove the actual boundary conditions and apply a set of statically determinate constraints. Typically
this procedure is done by constraining all six DOFs at a single grid point. If a single grid point is used,
make sure this single grid point contains six degrees of freedom. A single grid point of a model consisting
of all solid elements, for example, cannot satisfy this requirement since each grid point of a solid element
contains only three degrees of freedom.
2. Change all the thermal coefficients of expansion to a single value.
3. Apply a uniform ∆T to the structure.
If the model is “clean,” then the structure should be strain free; in other words, there should be no reaction loads,
element forces, or stresses. If this is not the case, then you may want to investigate around the vicinity where the
element forces or stresses are nonzero. Incorrect modelling of rigid elements or offsets is a common cause of these
types of errors. Once you are satisfied with your model, remember to change the boundary condition, thermal
coefficients of expansion, and ∆T back to their original values.
6.3.24.12.4 Load OLOAD and Reaction SPCFORCE Discrepancy using PARAM, PRTRESLT
Internal constraints (due to non-colinear CELASi) can also be detected when there is a discrepancy between the
OLOAD resultants and SPCFORCE resultants.
961
Second Edition
6.3.24.13 Deformed Shape
It is very illustrative to inspect the deformed shape DISP (PLOT) in order to ensure that the model correctly
simulates the intentions.
Deformed Shape
ASCII inspection is also recommended and is requested by DISP (PRINT).
6.3.24.14 Massless Mechanisms
A massless mechanism mode is defined as a shape that causes very small strain energy when the structure is
deflected in this shape. This shape also causes very little kinetic energy when the structure moves in this shape. The
ratio of strain energy over kinetic energy is proportional to the eigenvalue of this mode. This result is an
indeterminate quantity produced by two terms approaching zero. If applied loads excite this shape small loads can
cause very large deflections. If a real mode analysis can be forced to produce a solution in the presence of this
condition the mode produced with this shape can have any eigenvalue from positive infinity to negative infinity.
These frequencies may change drastically for small changes in the model, or when run on a different computer.
Eigensolution failures due to Sturm number inconsistencies are often due to the presence of massless mechanisms.
The presence of such modes reduces the reliability and repeatability of eigensolutions and dynamic analysis
solutions.
A method is now provided to automatically constrain massless mechanisms for eigensolutions, controlled by the
user parameter PARAM,MECHFIX,AUTO, which is turned on by default in MSC.Nastran. When this method is
used it is unlikely that the eigensolution will fail because of three failed shifts, and the solution produced will be
repeatable for small changes in the model, loading condition, or computer type used in the solution.
962
Second Edition
6.3.25 Isoparametric Elements and Numerical Integration 22
Most finite elements used in commercial codes are either isoparametric, super-parametric or sub-parametric
elements. These elements can map highly distorted curvilinear geometries. An isoparametric element maps the
geometry with the same shape functions defining the displacement function. A super-parametric element maps the
geometry with a higher order shape function than that which defines the displacement function. Finally, a sub-
parametric element maps the geometry with a lower order shape function than that which defines the displacement
function. Super-parametric and isoparametric representation is illustrated for the 3-noded triangle. The super-
parametric representation is presented as follows.
In the super-parametric representation, the triangular coordinates define the element geometry through the first set
of relationships. The second set of relationships show the displacement expansion defined by the shape functions,
which are in turn expressed in terms of the triangular coordinates. Evidently the element geometry and element
displacements are not treated equally. If we proceed to higher order triangles with straight sides, only the
displacement expansion is refined whereas the geometry definition remains the same. Elements built according to
this prescription are called super-parametric, a term that emphasizes that unequal treatment.
The key idea is to use the shape functions to represent both the element geometry and the problem unknowns,
which in structural mechanics are displacements. Hence the name isoparametric element (“iso” means equal), often
abbreviated to iso-P element.
22
963
Second Edition
To generalize to include other two-dimensional elements, the term triangular coordinates are replaced by the
general term natural coordinates. Natural coordinates (triangular coordinates for triangles, quadrilateral coordinates
for quadrilaterals) appear as parameters that define the shape functions. The shape functions then connect the
geometry with the displacements.
The generalization to an arbitrary two-dimensional element with n nodes is thus presented. Two sets of relations,
one for the element geometry and the other for the element displacements, are required. Both sets exhibit the same
interpolation in terms of the shape functions.
Combining both sets of expressions
Thus for the linear (3-noded) triangular element
The shape functions are simply the triangular coordinates
964
Second Edition
Since the resulting expression is the same as that produced by the super-parametric approach, the linear triangle is
actually both super-parametric and isoparametric. It is in fact the only triangle that is both super-parametric and
isoparametric. The 6-noded triangular element has the following geometric and displacement interpolation
where the shape functions are
The isoparametric version can thus have curved sides defined by the location of the mid-side nodes.
The natural coordinates for a triangular element are the triangular coordinates ζ1, ζ2 and ζ3. The natural coordinates
for a quadrilateral element are ξ and η. These are called quadrilateral coordinates. These coordinates vary from -1
on one side to +1 at the other. This particular variation range (instead of, say, 0 to 1) was chosen by the
investigators who originally developed isoparametric quadrilaterals to facilitate the use of the standard Gauss
integration formulas. The isoparametric 4-noded quadrilateral has the following geometric and displacement
interpolation
where the shape functions are
965
Second Edition
The element equilibrium equations can be written for a geometrically linear element to be
[ ]
{f } = ∫Ω [B A ]T [D A ][B A ]dΩ {d} + {∫Ω [B A ]T {σ}i dΩ}− {∫Ω [B A ]T [D A ]{ε}i dΩ}− {∫Ω [ N]Τ {b} dΩ}
Exact integration of the above stiffness matrix and the fixed end forces often cannot be done analytically. Constant
strain triangles (CST) have constant [B] and [D] matrices and are a rare exception to the rule since their stiffness
and fixed end force matrices can be integrated in closed form. For the quadrilateral, the matrix [B] often depends
on the location of the coordinates. This occurs because the shape functions once differentiated are still a function of
the natural coordinates.
The derivation of the stiffness terms is presented for the isoparametric quadrilateral. Partial derivatives of shape
functions with respect to the Cartesian coordinates x and y are required for the strain and stress calculations
ultimately to derive the stiffness matrix. Since the shape functions are not directly functions of x and y but of the
natural coordinates ξ and η, the determination of Cartesian partial derivatives is not trivial. We require the Jacobian
of two-dimensional transformations that connect the differentials of {x, y} to those of {ξ,η} and vice-versa.
Hence, the shape function derivatives in terms of the quadrilateral coordinates are
or in matrix form
These terms feature in the strain matrix [B] which ultimately yields the stiffness matrix [K] for the element. The
symbolic inversion of J for arbitrary ξ and η in general leads to extremely complicated expressions unless the
element has a particularly simple geometry. This complexity was one of the factors that motivated the use of
numerical integration techniques. The use of numerical integration is thus essential for evaluating element integrals
of isoparametric elements. The standard practice has been to use Gauss integration (also known as Gauss-Legendre
quadrature) because such rules use a minimal number of sample points to achieve a desired level of accuracy.
966
Second Edition
The Gauss integration rules in one dimension are
where p is the number of Gauss integration points (equal of more than one), wi are the integration weights and ξi
are the sample point abscissas in the interval –1 to 1. Hence the first four one dimensional Gauss rules are
The four rules integrate exactly polynomials in a ξ of orders up to 1, 3, 5 and 7, respectively. In general a one-
dimensional Gauss rule with p points integrates exactly polynomials of order up to 2p – 1. This is called the degree
of the formula.
The simplest two-dimensional Gauss rules are called product rules. They are obtained by applying the one-
dimensional rules to each independent variable in turn. To apply these rules we must first reduce the integrand to
the canonical form.
967
Second Edition
Once this is done we can process numerically each integral in turn.
where p1 and p2 are the number of Gauss points in the ξ and η directions, respectively. Usually the same number p
= p1 = p2 is chosen if the shape functions are taken to be the same in the ξ and η directions.
Hence, if the stiffness matrix is
Reducing the integrand into canonical form
This matrix function can be numerically integrated over the domain –1 ≤ ξ ≤ +1, –1 ≤ η ≤ +1 by an appropriate
Gauss product rule. For square 4-noded quadrilaterals, the integrand h BT EBJ is at most quadratic in ξ and η, and
hence 2 x 2 Gauss integration suffice to compute the integral exactly (i.e. the element is fully integrated and not
under-integrated). Using a higher order Gauss integration rule, such as 3 x 3 and 4 x 4, reproduces exactly the same
stiffness matrix produced by the 2 x 2 integration rule. Using a 1 x 1 rule yields a rank-deficiency matrix. For a
non-square quadrilateral, there is little difference in the stiffness matrix beyond the 2 x 2 Gauss integration, with
higher Gauss integration orders producing a slightly stiffer response (and hence slightly higher element natural
frequencies).
968
Second Edition
As for the 6-noded triangle, the same stiffness matrix is obtained for integration rule 3, rule -3 or rule 7 as long as
the triangular shape is maintained and the mid-side nodes are exactly at the mid-point between corner nodes. A
highly distorted triangle on the other hand will return varying stiffness matrices for different Gauss integration
rules.
A reduced integrated element (Gauss integration of a lower p order) may suffer from matrix singularities as there
are insufficient stiffness terms unlike a fully integrated element which will have all its stiffness terms calculated.
Under-integrated elements may thus suffer from hourglassing where the deformed shape shows clear zig-zag
patterns indicating DOFs which are not stiff.
However, often it is usually advantages to use A REDUCED INTEGRATION TECHNIQUE (i.e. the minimum
integration requirements that PRESERVES THE RATE OF CONVERGENCE which would result if exact
integration were used) as, for very good reasons, A CANCELLATION OF ERRORS due to discretization and
due to inexact integration can occur 23.
23
ZIENKIEWICZ, O.C. & TAYLOR, R.L. The Finite Element Method. The Basis. Volume 1. 5th Edition. Butterworth-
Heinemann, Oxford, 2000.
969
Second Edition
6.3.26 Element and Nodal Stress Recovery 24
Stress recovery concepts involve

I. stress recovery at the element Gauss points, then
II. subsequent stress extrapolation to the element grids, and
III. eventually, the (transformation into global coordinates and) averaging of the elemental stresses to
yield the grid point stresses
6.3.26.1 Stress Recovery at Gauss Points
In the stiffness method, the stresses are obtained from the computed displacements, and are thus derived quantities.
The accuracy of derived quantities is generally lower than that of primary quantities (the displacements). For
example, if the accuracy level of displacements is 1% that of the stresses may be typically 10% to 20%, and even
lower at boundaries. It is therefore of interest to develop techniques that enhance the accuracy of the computed
stresses. These procedures receive the generic name stress recovery techniques in the finite element literature.
Once the global displacements {U} solved for, and hence the elemental displacements {d} derived, the elemental
strain and stress can be obtained from
{ε} = [B]{d}
{σ} = [D][B]{d} + {σ}i − [D]{ε}i
It is of interest to evaluate and report these stresses at the element grid points located on the corners and possibly
midpoints of the element. These are called element grid point stresses. It is important to realize that the stresses
computed at the same grid point from adjacent elements will not generally be the same, since stresses are not
required to be continuous in displacement assumed finite elements. This suggests some form of stress averaging
can be used to improve the stress accuracy, and indeed this is part of the stress recovery technique. The results from
this averaging procedure are called grid point stresses. Hence to summarize there are the independent element
Gauss point stresses, the independent element grid point stresses and the dependent grid point stresses.
To obtain the independent element grid point stresses, two approaches are possible, namely
(a) Evaluate directly the stress at the element grid locations by substituting the natural coordinates of
the grid points as arguments to the shape functions.
(b) Evaluate the stress at the Gauss integration points used in the element stiffness integration rule and
then extrapolate to the element grid points.
Empirical evidence indicates that the second approach generally delivers better stress values for quadrilateral
elements whose geometry departs substantially from the rectangular shape. This is backed up by superconvergence
(i.e. values sampled at these points show an error which decreases more rapidly than elsewhere) results in finite
element approximation theory. Stresses sampled at superconvergent points converge at the same rate as the
unknown function or displacement and hence have errors of order O(hp+1). For rectangular elements there is no
difference. For isoparametric triangles both techniques deliver similar results (identical if the elements are straight
sided with mid-side nodes at midpoints) and so the advantages of the second one are marginal.
Hence, on many occasions the displacement or the unknown function is most accurately sampled at the nodes
defining the element and the gradients or stresses are best sampled at some interior points. The displacement or
unknown function and the stress or the gradients will be exact at the nodes and within the element if the shape
function contains the exact theoretical solution to the governing differential equation. When the shape function is of
a polynomial of lower order or simply does not contain the exact theoretical solution, the displacement or the
unknown function is most accurately sampled at the nodes than anywhere else whilst the stress or the gradients is
most accurate at some interior point depending on the order of the element. This can be explained qualitatively as
24
970
Second Edition
follows. Linear elements such as QUAD4 and TRIA3 have constant first gradient or stress values. If the true stress
distribution is linear, the constant FE representation will be exact at the middle of the element. For the quadratic
elements of QUAD8 and TRIA6 (with linear FE representation of stress), the 2-point Gauss-Legendre will provide
superconvergent sampling of stress. In general, the best accuracy is obtainable for gradients or stresses at the Gauss
points corresponding, in order, to the polynomial used in the solution of the unknown function. As far as the
optimal points for gradient or stress recovery is concerned, it was observed experimentally by Barlow and proved
by Herrmann, that the optimal (not exact because of isoparametric distortion) superconvergent points are the
Gauss-Legendre points. This almost always corresponds to the locations of the Gauss-Legendre points for reduced
integration (i.e. integration whilst still maintaining the rate of convergence if fully integrated).
6.3.26.2 Extrapolation of Stress From Gauss Points to Element Grids
Now that the optimum internal stresses are obtained i.e. at the Gauss points, it is necessary to extrapolate these to
the corner and possibly the middle of the element in order to obtain a complete picture. Stress contours are
calculated by interpolation involving an extrapolation from the Gauss points to the grids. This means that for
element with high stress gradients the interpolated values will be less accurate than for elements with low stress
gradients. It is important to check to see what variation of stress exists over the element and if it is large it may be
necessary to refine the mesh locally to overcome this problem. Within an isoparametric finite element, stresses are
calculated at Gauss points, and are converted from these Gauss point values to grid values.
6.3.26.2.1 Bilinear Extrapolation
For QUAD4, had the stresses chosen to be computed at the (non-optimum) 2 x 2 Gauss integration points, each
stress component is “carried” to the corner nodes and the center of the element through a bilinear extrapolation
based on the computed values at the Gauss points. The optimum superconvergent Gauss point for a QUAD4 is at
the center. Here we are only demonstrating the principle of bilinear extrapolation. To understand the extrapolation
procedure more clearly it is convenient to consider the region bounded by the Gauss points as an “internal element”
or “Gauss element”.
The Gauss element, is also a four-node quadrilateral. Its quadrilateral (natural) coordinates are denoted by ξ’ and η’.
These are linked to ξ and η by the simple relations
Any scalar quantity w whose values wi’ at the Gauss element corners are known can be interpolated through the
usual bilinear shape functions now expressed in terms of ξ’ and η’.
971
Second Edition
To extrapolate w to corner 1, say, we replace its ξ’ and η’ coordinates, namely ξ’ = η’ = -31/2, into the above
formula. Doing that for the four corners we obtain
Note that the sum of the coefficients in each row is one, as it should be. Also, note that each stress component is
extrapolated independently.
6.3.26.2.2 Superconvergent Patch Recovery (SPR) method (ZIENKIEWICZ, 2000)
This is a highly efficient method of stress extrapolation.
6.3.26.2.3 Recovery by Equilibration of Patches (REP) method (ZIENKIEWICZ, 2000)
This is a highly efficient method of stress extrapolation.
6.3.26.3 (Transformation into Global Coordinates and) Averaging of the Elemental Grid Stresses to Yield
the Grid Point Stresses
The stress is calculated on an element by element basis (unlike the displacement) so it is possible, and in fact very
likely, that the stresses at a grid in one element will not match up with the stress at the same grid in an adjacent
element (irrespective of whether the elemental stress is calculated directly at the grids or by extrapolation from the
Gauss points). In some cases, where there is a discontinuity in the material properties or the thickness of the
elements, it is correct that there is a local stress discontinuity, however in other cases this stress difference will be a
measure of the error in the solution. When contour plots of the stresses are required, or when a stress value is
required for design purposes it is better to have a single value. The values from all the adjacent independent
elements grid point stresses at a grid can be averaged to give a single value at the grid, i.e. the dependent grid point
stresses. This averaging can be weighted based on the element type, geometry etc. if required. Typically the
determinant of the Jacobian divided by the total element volume is used as the basis of the weighting function since
this will emphasize those elements that have a large amount of material related to the node at the expense of those
elements that are rather elongated. However it should be remembered that the stresses, which look smooth and
continuous on the plots, are in fact calculated as a series of discontinuous stress patches. As the mesh is refined, the
element stress values will tend to converge. Hence, the averaged grid point stress can be used as an error estimator.
The averaging of the element grid stresses is best performed in the post-processor. Averaging SHOULD NOT be
performed between dissimilar element types, between shells of differing thickness, beams of differing cross
sections nor between elements of different material properties.
972
Second Edition
6.3.26.4 Element Stress Recovery Procedures in MSC.NASTRAN
6.3.26.4.1 CQUAD4 Elements
CENTRE method requests element stress recovery at center only. This is the default for QUAD4 elements and is
the optimum sampling point. This is requested with ELSTRESS (CENTER).
BILINEAR stress recovery procedure requests stress recovery at center and at element grids. This is requested
with ELSTRESS (CORNER). This method uses the results at the gauss points to create a linear function that is then
used to extrapolate the results out to the grid points. In the case of a linear varying moment in a cantilevered
engineering beam model, since the QUAD4 element is an almost constant strain curvature element, the gauss
results are constant curvature in each element, thus the linear function is almost constant curvature for each
element, thus the CORNER strain curvatures are almost constant in an element, hence the reason for the CENTER
method being the default for QUAD4. In a cantilevered beam problem, corner stress output using the bilinear
method will cause a step function from the cantilever point to the load application point, which is obviously a
coarse approximation of the correct linear stress distribution of the engineering model. To conclude, the bilinear
corner stress option uses the grid displacements to interpolate strains to gauss points using the element shape
functions. Stresses are then calculated at these gauss points. Finally, these stresses are extrapolated to grids using a
bilinear stress function.
CUBIC stress recovery requests stress recovery at the grids directly without calculating at the Gauss points; In
MSC.NASTRAN the CUBIC method works from the grid displacements. It uses the grid displacements and
rotations to curve-fit a cubic equation to develop the element strain/curvature distribution. In the case of a linear
varying moment in the cantilevered beam engineering model, since the grid point rotations vary across the element,
the curve fit gives the correct engineering result of a linearly varying strain curvature across the QUAD4 element,
which translates to a linear varying stress. This method is much like the cubic beam stress recovery.
SGAGE stress recovery requests stress recovery at the grids directly without calculating at the Gauss points; In
MSC.NASTRAN, the SGAGE method is similar to the CUBIC method in that grid displacements are used, but in-
plane strains and curvatures are calculated independently. First strains are calculated in the u and v and diagonal uv
directions at each grid point. The state of in-plane strain at the grid point is calculated using rosette strain gauge
equations. Grid strain curvatures are done similarly. The resulting grid point strain and curvature states can then be
changed to forces and stresses at the grid points.
The BILINEAR option is the default because it is the most stable in all cases, but as is shown in the linearly
varying moment case, it can be much less accurate than the CUBIC method. The CUBIC method is very accurate if
the mesh if fine enough to give accurate displacements. However, coarse meshes can cause the cubic curve-fit to be
more inaccurate than the BILINEAR method. The SGAGE method is similar to the CUBIC method but not as
accurate and is quite obsolete.
Stiffness matrix integration and stress calculation need not necessarily use the same Gauss Quadrature Rule, i.e. the
stresses may be calculated at the more accurate (superconvergent) lower order Gauss Rule and the stiffness fully
integrated. Because we know that the (fully integrated) stress variation of the finite element is not good enough to
capture variation in reality, we use reduced integration stress recovery techniques, as recovery is best at the lower
order Gauss points. This is what happens with the BILINEAR, SPR and REP recovery methods; not with CUBIC
or SGAGE methods which do not extrapolate stresses from the Gauss points, instead calculates stresses from the
displacements and rotations at the nodes. Hence, we can say that BILINEAR, SPR or REP are better when the fully
integrated stress variation is not good enough, but CUBIC or SGAGE is better when the fully integrated stress
variation is good enough to model reality. In any case, the results should converge with refinement of the mesh.
Reiterating, BILINEAR is the superconvergent reduced integrated (although can be fully integrated as well if the
finite element variation is deemed accurate enough to model reality) stress recovery (i.e. stress recovery at Gauss
points based on, the not so high order polynomial, shape functions defined by the displacement unknowns; then
973
Second Edition
extrapolation from Gauss points), and CUBIC is the (fully integrated) stress recovery (i.e. stress recovery not at
Gauss points but throughout the element based on shape functions defined by the unknowns). Hence, we can say
that the reduced integrated BILINEAR is better when the fully integrated stress variation is not good enough, but
CUBIC is better when the fully integrated stress variation is good enough to model reality. In any case, the results
should converge with refinement of the mesh. The ELSTRESS (CENTER) outputs the σx, σy and τxy stresses in the
element coordinate system (MCID field of CQUAD4) at the center of the element on the top and bottom surfaces.
The ELFORCE (CENTER) outputs the membrane forces per unit length Fx, Fy, and Fxy, bending moments per
unit length Mx, My and Mxy and transverse shear forces per unit length Qx and Qy, all in the element coordinate
system at the center of the element.
The ELSTRESS (CORNER) outputs the σx, σy and τxy stresses in the element coordinate system at the center and
4 corners of the element on the top and bottom surfaces.
974
Second Edition
The ELFORCE (CORNER) outputs the membrane forces per unit length Fx, Fy, and Fxy, bending moments per
unit length Mx, My and Mxy and transverse shear forces per unit length Qx and Qy, all in the element coordinate
system at the center and 4 corners of the element.
Note that the options CENTER or CORNER are not applicable to elements other than QUAD4.
6.3.26.4.2 CQUAD8
The ELSTRESS outputs the σx, σy and τxy stresses in the element coordinate system at the center and 4 corners of
the element on the top and bottom surfaces.
The ELFORCE outputs the membrane forces per unit length Fx, Fy, and Fxy, bending moments per unit length Mx,
My and Mxy and transverse shear forces per unit length Qx and Qy, all in the element coordinate system at the
center and 4 corners of the element.
975
Second Edition
6.3.26.4.3 CTRIA3
The ELSTRESS outputs the σx, σy and τxy stresses in the element coordinate system at the center of the element on
the top and bottom surfaces. The ELFORCE outputs the membrane forces per unit length Fx, Fy, and Fxy, bending
moments per unit length Mx, My and Mxy and transverse shear forces per unit length Qx and Qy, all in the element
coordinate system at the center of the element.
6.3.26.4.4 CTRIA6
The ELSTRESS outputs the σx, σy and τxy stresses in the element coordinate system at the center and 3 corners of
the element on the top and bottom surfaces. The ELFORCE outputs the membrane forces per unit length Fx, Fy,
and Fxy, bending moments per unit length Mx, My and Mxy and transverse shear forces per unit length Qx and Qy,
all in the element coordinate system at the center and 3 corners of the element.
6.3.26.4.5 CHEXA4, CHEXA20, CPENTA6, CPENTA15, CTETRA4, CTETRA10
The ELSTRESS outputs the σx, σy ,σz, τxy ,τzx and τyz stresses in the element, basic (default) or material
(depending on CORDM field of the PSOLID entry) coordinate system at the center and either the corners
(default) or the Gauss points (depending on PSOLID entry) of the element.
976
Second Edition
6.3.26.5 Grid Point Stresses in MSC.NASTRAN
Although it is usual to perform the grip point stress calculation in the post-processor, it is instructive to know that
MSC.NASTRAN also has the feature of calculating grid point stresses. Moreover, the methods used within the
post-processor are usually similar. The grid point stress option calculates the stresses at the grid points from the
adjoining plate and solid elements in the global or a user defined coordinate system. Each stress component (e.g.
σx) is treated independently of other stress components in the calculation of average grid point stress components.
The stress invariants at grid points (i.e., principal stresses, the Hencky-von Mises stress, and the mean pressure) are
evaluated from the average values of the stress components at the grid points.
Most element have vertex element stress (i.e. element grid point stress) values. These include CQUADR,
CQUAD4 (with corner option), CQUAD8, CTRIAR, and CTRIA6 shell elements as well as the CHEXA,
CPENTA, and CTETRA solid elements. But not CQUAD4 (without corner option) and CTRIA3.
Two methods are used to calculate grid point stress components for plate and shell elements namely, topological
and geometric, with topological as the default method.
Topological Geometric
Averages stresses at grids with element vertex Averages stresses at grids with element vertex stresses,
stresses, ignores CQUAD4 (without corner option) ignores CQUAD4 (without corner option) and
and CTRIA3. CTRIA3.
Grids with only CQUAD4 (without corner option) Grids with only CQUAD4 (without corner option)
and/or CTRIA3, average of center stress used. Hence and/or CTRIA3, average stress obtained from least
no element size consideration. square approximation. Hence size of element
considered.
Recognizes stresses at interior, corner, or edge grid Recognizes stresses at interior, corner, or edge grid
points to be continuous between directly connected points to be continuous between directly connected
elements. Does not recognize exception grid points. elements. Recognizes stresses at exception grid points
User defined separate surface sets adjacent to to be discontinuous (large slope between adjacent
exception grids required. elements cause stress discontinuities) between
connected elements and, a different grid point stress
may be output for each of the connected elements.
If the results are substantially different when using the two different methods, it may be an indication that the FE
model is not fine enough. In general, if the FE model is fine enough to capture the stress gradients, the two
methods should yield similar results. The NASTRAN request interface is as follows.
$ CASE CONTROL
ELSTRESS (PLOT) = ALL $ Required
$
SET 10 = < SURFACE IDs > say < 100, 200 >
GPSTRESS = 10 $ Printed Output of Grid Point Stresses
STRFIELD = 10 $ Graphical Output of Grid Point Stresses
$
OUTPUT(POST)
SET 1 = < Element IDs > For shells, Z-normals (defining top and bottom
SET 2 = < Element IDs > surfaces) are required. Specify VOLUME for solids.
SURFACE 100 SET 1 NORMAL Z
SURFACE 200 SET 2 NORMAL Z
The element positive normal is in the direction of the z-axis of the basic coordinate system. By default, the grid
point stresses are transformed to the basic coordinate system. The grid point stresses are called out by the
GPSTRESS command, which points to set 10, which, in turn, points to surfaces 100 and 200.
977
Second Edition
The GPSTRESS output is presented as follows.
978
Second Edition
6.3.27 Full Integration Quadrature, Reduced Integration Quadrature and Optimal Gauss Sampling Points
It is usually advantages to use A REDUCED INTEGRATION TECHNIQUE (i.e. the minimum integration
requirements that PRESERVES THE RATE OF CONVERGENCE which would result if exact integration
were used) as, for very good reasons, A CANCELLATION OF ERRORS due to discretization and due to
inexact integration can occur 25.
As far as the optimal points for gradient or stress recovery is concerned, it was observed experimentally by Barlow
and proved by Herrmann, that the optimal (not exact because of isoparametric distortion) superconvergent points
are the Gauss-Legendre points. This almost always corresponds to the locations of the Gauss-Legendre points for
reduced integration (i.e. integration whilst still maintaining the rate of convergence if fully integrated).
Optimum
Superconvergent
Fully
Sampling Points Reduced
Fully Integrated Integrated
Element Displacement Variation (Reduced Integrated Stress
Stress Variation Gauss
Integration Variation
Quadrature
Gauss
Quadrature)
My, Mz linear in x; My, Mz linear in x;
Two-noded
y = constant + x + x2 + x3 Vy, Vz constant in x; Vy, Vz constant in x;
C1 Cubic 2 2
Complete 3rd order Ax constant in x; Ax constant in x;
Beam
Tx constant in x; Tx constant in x;
In-plane C0 u = constant + x + y Both 1 x 1
σx, σy and τxy σx, σy and τxy
Linear TRIA3 v = constant + x + y
constant is x and y constant in x and y
(CST) Complete 1st order
Rule 3 or –3 Optimal
In-plane C0 u = constant + x + y + x2 + xy + y2
σx, σy and τxy linear Sampling σx, σy and τxy linear
Parabolic v = constant + x + y + x2 + xy + y2
is x and y Reduced in x and y
TRIA6 (LST) Complete 2nd order
Integration
σx constant in x,
u = constant + x + y + xy 2x2 Both 1 x 1
In-plane C0 linear in y;
v = constant + x + y + xy σx, σy and τxy
Linear σy constant in y,
Complete 1st order; Incomplete 2nd constant in x and y
QUAD4 linear in x;
order
τxy linear is x and y
u = constant + x + y + xy + x2 + xy
σx linear in x,
In-plane C0 + y2 + x3y 3x3 Both 2 x 2
parabolic in y;
Parabolic v = constant + x + y + xy + x2 + xy σx, σy and τxy linear
σy linear in y,
QUAD8 + y2 + xy3 in x and y
parabolic in x;
(Serendipity) Complete 2nd order; Incomplete 3rd
order τxy parabolic in x, y
Out-of-plane w = constant + x + y + x2 + xy + y2
σx linear in x
C1 Kirchhoff + x3 + y3 + x2y + xy2 + x3y + xy3
Complete 3rd order σy linear in y
QUAD4
Out-of-plane 1 x 1 or 2 x 2
2 x 2 bending
C0 Mindlin bending σx, σy constant
2 x 2 shear
QUAD4 1 x 1 shear
Out-of-plane 2 x 2 or 3 x 3
3 x 3 bending
C0 Mindlin bending σx, σy linear
3 x 3 shear
QUAD8 2 x 2 shear
1x1x1
u = constant + x + y + z
Linear v = constant + x + y + z σx, σy, σz, τxy, τyz, τzx
TETRA4 w = constant + x + y + z constant
Complete 1st order
25
ZIENKIEWICZ, O.C. & TAYLOR, R.L. The Finite Element Method. The Basis. Volume 1. 5th Edition. Butterworth-
Heinemann, Oxford, 2000.
979
Second Edition
Parabolic
TETRA10
u = constant + x + y + z + xy + yz +
zx + xyz
Linear v = likewise
2x2x2 1x1x1
HEXA8 w = likewise
Complete 1st order; Incomplete 2nd
order
u = constant + x + y + z + x2 + y2 +
2
z2 + xy + yz + zx + x2y + xy2 + y z
2 2 2 2
+ yz + z x + zx + xyz + x yz +
Parabolic 2 2
xy z + xyz 3x3x3 2x2x2
HEXA20 v = likewise
w = likewise
Complete 2nd order; Incomplete 3rd
order
980
Second Edition
6.3.28 Stress Interpretation
Stress recovery concepts, namely

have been covered. Here we shall focus on the engineering interpretation of these stresses.
A solid element outputs (the appropriate variations of) 3 normal stresses and 3 shear stresses σxx , σyy , σzz , τxy , τyz ,
τzx in its element coordinate system. A shell element outputs (the appropriate variations of) 2 normal stresses and 1
shear stress σxx , σyy , τxy in its element coordinate system. A beam element outputs (the appropriate variations of) 2
bending moments Myy and Mzz, 2 shear forces Fy and Fz, 1 torsional moment Mxx and 1 axial force Fx. Stresses from
solids and shells can be cumulated into forces if the design criteria are specified (as is usual for composite material
such as reinforced concrete) in terms of moments, shear and axial forces. Conversely, forces from beam elements
can be used to derive stresses based on simple bending theory.
Element stress recovery is (unless otherwise specified) done in the element coordinate system. To define a beam,
the two end nodes define the x-direction of the element from node 1 to node 2. The third node defines either its y-
or z-axis. To define shells, the direction of the node number definitions defines the element x- and y-axes. The z-
axis is then automatically defined using the Right Hand Rule usually. Likewise, for solids, the numbering of the
nodes will define the x-, y- and z-axes. A preprocessor should be used to plot the element coordinate systems for all
the elements (ensuring that it is consistent with the element coordinate definition of the particular code).
For beams, the elements X-, Y- and Z- axes must be orientated in the same manner. Stress recovery is
performed in the beam local element system. No transformation into a global system is performed, hence the
requirement for the elements to be orientation consistently for the bending moment and shear force diagrams about
and in the two directions to look consistent between elements.
For shells, the element Z-normals must be consistent. This is because the top and bottom surface stresses need to
be viewed consistently. Stress recovery is performed in the element coordinate system by default (but defined
by MCID entry on element connection card; 0 for basic projected, > 0 for user projected, < blank > for
element coordinate system, > 0.0 and < 360.0 for angled from side n1-n2 of element). The element results are
then usually transformed into the global coordinate system. Of course, unless the results are transformed into the
global coordinate system, the definition of the X- and Y- element coordinate system between elements of the same
type must also be consistent. Alternatively, a random element X- and Y- orientation (but consistent Z-normals of
course) can be used between elements of the same type if after stress recovery, the output is transformed (by the
post-processor) into the global coordinate system.
For solid elements, the stress recovery is performed in the basic coordinate system by default (but defined on
CORDM field of PSOLID; 0 for basic, > 0 for user-defined, -1 for element coordinate system). Hence, if the
stress recovery is presented in the basic coordinate system, a random X-, Y-, Z- element orientation can be used.
To conclude, the element X-, Y- and Z- orientation for beams must be consistent as stress recovery is
presented in the element coordinate system, the Z-normal for shells must be consistent but the element X-
and Y- orientation can be random as long as the stress recovery is presented in the global coordinate system,
and for solids a random X-, Y- and Z- element orientation is fine as long as the stress recovery is presented
in the global coordinate system.
Note that although the element stress tensors σxx , σyy , σzz , τxy , τyz , τzx must be viewed in a consistent coordinate
system, derived quantities are independent of the element orientation. These invariant quantities included
maximum and minimum principal stresses, maximum shear stress and the von Mises stress.
981
Second Edition
6.3.28.1 State of Stress i.e. Global Coordinate Stress Tensors σxx , σyy , σzz , τxy , τyz , τzx
Normal stresses are normal to the plane

and shear stresses act on the plane. The
first subscript in the stress notation
denotes the direction of the normal to the
plane on which the stress acts and the
second subscript indicates the direction
of the stress itself.
In shells and solids, stresses in the element coordinate system are usually quite meaningless. The state of stress
(three normal and three shear stresses in general) at a point with reference to the global Cartesian system is also
quite insignificant in its original form. However, the various derived stress quantities, which can be obtained, are
very illustrative. These are presented as follows.
(i) The load path of flow of stresses through the structure can be ascertained very intuitively from the
principal normal stresses σ1 , σ2 and σ3. When an element is orientated such that all its shear stress
components are zero, the normal stresses on its 3 planes are called the principal stresses σ1, σ2 and
σ3 from most positive to most negative. When one of the principal stresses are zero, the stress state
is biaxial (or plane stress). When two of the principal stresses are zero, the stress state is then
uniaxial. Let us assume tensile as positive. σ2 and σ3 that is close to zero indicates a state of
uniaxial tensile stress if σ1 positive. σ2 and σ1 that is close to zero indicates a state of uniaxial
compressive stress if σ3 negative. Note that the principal stress orientation is a function of loading,
not geometry alone. Hence, a plot of principal stresses is dependent upon a particular load case.
The direction of flow of stresses (if tensile) is a good indication of the optimum direction of
reinforcement to be provided in reinforced concrete.
Flows of Stresses i.e. Principal Stresses on a Structural Connection Casting

(ii) The state of overall stress, i.e. compressive or tensile can be ascertained from the average stress.
(iii) The susceptibility of the structure to a specified failure mode can be assessed.
982
Second Edition
6.3.28.2 Failure Criteria
The applicable failure criterion for a particular material depends on whether the material is ductile or brittle.
Ductile materials yield and then undergo significant plastic deformation before ultimate fracture. Brittle materials
do not yield and undergo plastic deformation, but fractures when the ultimate strength is attained. Carbon steel and
aluminium are generally ductile materials whilst concrete, masonry, quenched tempered alloy steel, hardened
tool steel and gray cast iron are brittle materials. Of course, certain composite materials such as reinforced
concrete and reinforced masonry can be deemed to be ductile materials.
However, some materials become more brittle as the strain-rate increases and temperature decreases. Some
metals such as copper and aluminium have a crystalline structure that enables them to resist fast fracture under
all loading conditions and at all temperatures. This is not the case with ferrous alloys, particularly structural steel
which is brittle below the transition temperature.
Ductile materials usually have approximately the same ultimate tensile and compressive strengths. Brittle materials
on the other hand are usually stronger in compression than in tension. For instance, the ultimate compressive
strength of gray cast iron can be 3 to 4 times its ultimate tensile strength. There are exceptions, for instance the
brittle hardened tool steel which has similar ultimate strengths in both tension and compression.
If the percentage elongation in a tensile test is less than 5% at ultimate strength or if there is no published yield
strength, then assume brittle behaviour.
It will be shown that ductile materials tend to yield along 45° shear slip planes at the same pure normal stress,
whether in tension or compression, i.e. if a ductile specimen were to be loaded in tension to fracture, the fractures
will all be at an angle of approximately 45° from the loading axis. On the other hand, a tensile specimen of brittle
material does tend to fail in tension (i.e. fracture on a plane orthogonal to the maximum principal tensile stress) and
in shear at approximately 45° angles when loaded to fracture in compression.
983
Second Edition
6.3.28.2.1 Ductile Yielding (Plastic Flow) Failure Criteria
A yielding failure occurs when the material yields such that it compromises the performance of the structure in its
load carrying capacity. Localized yielding around stress concentrations may be acceptable as a ductile material is
capable of redistributing the stresses sufficiently for yielding to stop at a distance from the concentration whilst not
compromising the integrity of the structure. The ductile failure theories are as follows.
σ2
Tresca is the safest criterion,
Maximum Shear Stress σy but the best match to
(Tresca) Failure Criterion Von Mises experimental data is the von
Failure Criterion
Mises criterion. Any of these
failure criteria can be
σy σ1
−σy employed on a set of loadcases
and enveloped.
Principal Normal Stress
−σy Failure Criterion
Principal Normal Stresses σ1 , σ2 and σ3 Failure Criterion
The principal normal stresses are the maximum, minimum and intermediate normal stresses that occur when the
element is rotated onto its principal plane. The shear stresses are zero on these principal planes. Visualize the 3-
dimensional Mohr Circle of stresses (3 circles). The principal stresses in two dimensions are presented, as is that in
three dimensions as a solution of a 3rd order equation.
σ 3 + I1σ 2 + I 2 σ − I 3 = 0
σ x + τ xy  σx − σy 
2 where I1 = σ x + σ y + σ z
σ1, 2 = ±   + τ xy 2
I 2 = σ x σ y + σ y σ z + σ z σ x − τ xy − τ yz − τ zx
2 2 2
2  2 
I 3 = σ x σ y σ z + 2τ xy τ yz τ zx − σ x τ yz − σ y τ zx − σ z τ xy
2 2 2
The maximum normal stress failure criterion states that failure occurs whenever σ1 or σ3 equals the failure strength
of the material in tension or compression, respectively. For ductile materials, failure by yielding occurs when the
yield strength is attained whilst failure by fracture occurs when the ultimate strength is reached. Ductile materials
have approximately the same ultimate tensile and compressive strengths. This theory however does not account for
the entire complex triaxial stress state and hence assumes that yielding (flowing) occurs either along the direction
of the maximum principal stress or the minimum principal stress. A plot of the maximum principal stress (tension)
and the minimum principal stress (compression) can be generated for all load cases and enveloped.
Maximum and Minimum Principal Stresses on a Structural Connection Casting
984
Second Edition
Von Mises-Hencky (Distortion Energy) Stress σvon mises Failure Criterion
The von Mises (or effective stress) stress is a measure of the distortional stresses. It gives a good indication of how
close a material is to yielding or experiencing plastic flow. It is based upon strain energy hypothesis and represents
the entire complex triaxial stress state. This yield criterion is suitable for pressure independent material models i.e.
materials that will not flow (fail) under the conditions of hydrostatic stress. With this material model the yield
surface is independent of pressure (average stress). This is typical of materials such as steel. The material yields
when the von Mises stress reaches the one-dimensional yield strength, σvm = σy
or, alternatively in terms of principal stresses
The von Mises model provides the best match to experimental data of failure limits. A plot of the von Mises state
of stress can be generated for all load cases and enveloped.
Von Mises on a Structural Casting, σvm < σy = 350MPa OK
Maximum Shear Stress (Tresca) Failure Criterion
The Tresca yield criterion is based on the maximum shear stress and is especially useful for predicting the yielding
of annealed ductile materials. The Tresca criterion specifies that if any stress component exceeds the specified yield
strength, the material will flow (undergo plastic deformation). It is more conservative than the principal normal
stress and the von Mises stress failure criteria. The Tresca criterion states that failure by yielding occurs on a shear
slip plane i.e. at 45° to the principal planes when the maximum shear stress equals ½ the yield strength.
τ13 = (σ1 − σ3)/2 = σy/2
The theory is suggested by the fact that yielding is related to shear slip (at the plane of maximum shear stress which
is 45° to the planes of the maximum and minimum principal stresses) at the atomic level of the material. A plot of
the maximum shear stress τ13 of stress can be generated for all load cases and enveloped.
Tresca Failure Criterion: Max Shear Stress, τ13 = (σ1 − σ3)/2 < σy/2 = 175MPa OK
985
Second Edition
6.3.28.2.2 Brittle Fracture (Frictional) Failure Criteria
Brittle fracture occurs when the material cracks such that it becomes detrimental to the structural performance in its
load carrying capacity. Fracture occurs when cracks appear without significant permanent (plastic) deformation.
Principal Normal Stresses σ1 , σ2 and σ3 Failure Criterion
The maximum normal stress failure criterion states that failure occurs whenever σ1 or σ3 equals the failure strength
of the material in tension or compression, respectively. For brittle materials, failure by fracture occurs when the
ultimate strength (not yield strength as in ductile materials) is attained. Brittle materials are usually stronger in
compression than tension. Fracture is deemed to occur either in the plane normal to the maximum tensile stress
for a tensile failure or in a plane oblique to the maximum compressive stress as what appears to be a shear
fracture (but not as a rule on the plane of maximum shear stress) for a failure in compression.
Mohr-Coulomb Failure Criterion
Brittle materials such as concrete, soil, gray cast iron and hardened tool steel are held together by frictional forces
and they fail by sliding. The effect of the stress normal to the failure plane is important and should be included in
the failure criterion. Fracture occurs when the maximum and minimum principal stresses satisfies the following
equation.
(σ1 / σut) − (σ3 / σuc) > 1.0
where σut and σuc the represent the ultimate tensile and compressive strengths.
τ
φ
σuc σ3 σ1 σut σ
This theory is best used in brittle materials that are much stronger in compression. The Mohr-Coulomb equivalent
stress is analogous to the Tresca failure criterion but incorporates the effect of the normal stress, unlike Tresca,
which is pressure independent. Fracture is deemed to occur either in the plane normal to the maximum tensile
stress for a tensile failure or in a plane oblique to the maximum compressive stress as what appears to be a
shear fracture (but not as a rule on the plane of maximum shear stress) for a failure in compression.
A special case occurs in certain brittle materials such as hardened tool steel where the ultimate strengths are the
same both in tension and compression. In this case the criteria becomes
(σ1 / σut) − (σ3 / σuc) < 1.0
(σ1 / σu) − (σ3 / σu) < 1.0
σ1 − σ3 < σu
which is exactly similar (in expression only) to the ductile (maximum shear stress) Tresca τ13 = (σ1 − σ3)/2 = σy/2
criteria. Of course the mode of failure remains different in the brittle material (plane normal to the maximum
tensile stress for a tensile failure or in a plane 45° oblique to the maximum compressive stress) compared to ductile
materials (45° to principal planes for failure in either tension or compression). But the fact remains that the
maximum shear stress can be plotted on a post-processor to determine if the special equal (in tension and
compression) strength brittle material meets the Mohr-Coulomb criterion or not.
986
Second Edition
BS 5950-Part1:2000 (cl. 2.4.4) Criterion
Brittle fracture is used to describe fast unstable fractures, in contrast to stable fractures such as fatigue or slow
unstable fractures such as plastic yielding. Some metals such as copper and aluminium have a crystalline structure
that enables them to resist fast fracture under all loading conditions and at all temperatures. This is not the case
with ferrous alloys, particularly structural steel. The Liberty ships and the King Street bridge in Melbourne, the
Sea Gem drilling rig for North Sea gas and the Alexander Kielland oil rig are a few examples of the casualties of
brittle fracture. An important feature of steel is the transistion temperature between ductile and brittle fracture.
To determine the risk of brittle fracture, the following are considered: -
I. minimum operating temperature
II. thickness of material to be used
III. steel grade
IV. stress level
V. detail; parent plate, weld metal or heat affected zone HAZ, holes
VI. strain-rate
In addition, the welding electrodes or other welding consumables should have a specified Charpy impact value
equivalent to, or better than, that specified for the parent metal. BS 5950-Part 1:2000 (cl. 2.4.4) gives maximum
permissible thicknesses of steel at given operating temperatures based on Charpy toughness energy absorption
impact tests. The steel quality selected for each component should be such that the thickness t of each element
where t1 is the limiting thickness at the appropriate minimum service temperature Tmin for a given steel grade and
quality
where Tmin is the minimum service temperature, Ynom is the nominal yield strength for thickness < 16mm for the
steel grade used and T27J is the test temperature at which 27J Charpy value was obtained as according to Table 7.
Table 4 and Table 5 presents the calculated the t1 values.
987
Second Edition
K is a factor that depends on the type of detail, the general stress level, the stress concentration effects and the
strain conditions. Values are given in Table 3.
In addition, the maximum thickness of the component should not exceed the maximum thickness t2 at which the
full Charpy impact value applies to the selected steel quality for that product type and steel grade, according to the
relevant product standard, see Table 6.
988
Second Edition
6.3.28.2.3 Large Deflections due to Insufficient Stiffness
The structure may be deemed to fail if certain sections deform considerably (static or dynamic response may be too
high) under the applied excitation such that it fails to meet the required deflection tolerance criteria.
6.3.28.2.4 Buckling
Buckling is the sudden loss of stability or stiffness under the applied loads. The stress levels may not even be
sufficiently high for failure by yielding to occur, in which case a linear elastic buckling analysis will predict this
failure. See Section 3.2.
6.3.28.2.5 Fatigue
Components subject to repetitive cycles of loading may fail after a certain number of cycles. A pseudo-static or
dynamic fatigue analysis is required to predict this failure. See Section 5.5.
6.3.28.2.6 Creep or Viscoelasticity
Structures under load gradually deform over time. This may be accounted for by modifying the stiffness modulus
with an apparent creep modulus. Creep or viscoelasticity is a time dependent, plastic deformation under sustained
load. The amount of creep experienced is a function of time, temperature and applied load. Creep is more
significant for plastics even under room temperature. Creep is not significant for most metals until operating
temperatures reach 35 to 70 percent of respective melting points.
989
Second Edition
6.3.28.3 Deriving Forces (Moments, Shear, Torsion & Axial Force) from Stresses in Shells
Moments, shear, torsion and axial forces are usually the design criteria for composite material such as reinforced
concrete. Hence, to facilitate the design of these structural elements, often the computed stresses are summed to
obtain the equivalent averaged forces. The stresses and hence forces obtained from a shell is summarized as
follows.
Zero for shells
The output stresses are

the in-plane normal stresses σxx and σyy, varying linear through the thickness
the in-plane shear stresses τxy, varying linearly through the thickness
the out-of-plane shear stresses τxz and τyz, constant through the thickness although from equilibrium
considerations, they should vary parabolically
From these, the in-plane force tensors Nx, Ny and Nxy, the bending tensors Mx, My and Mxy and the through-
thickness shear force vectors Qx and Qy.
These simplify to
Note that these are forces and moments based on the stresses and hence act over the same width that the stresses
act. For design purposes, often a per meter width design moment and force are required. Hence, the values of
moments and forces of all elements over the physical width of a meter should be averaged for the design values.
On a further note on design, the complications of designing for the torsional moment (derived from the in-plane
bending shear stresses) Mxy is avoided by increasing the design moments Mxx and Myy as follows.
990
Second Edition
6.3.29 The Element Strain Energy Density
The element strain energy is basically the elastic energy stored in the structural element. As an example, if you hold
onto one end of the spring and push slowly on the other end starting from rest, the load deflection curve looks as
follows for small deflections.
The strain energy U = 0.5Fδ = 0.5kδ2. The strain energy distribution
within a structure denotes the elements that are working the hardest,
i.e. the higher the strain energy, the harder the element is working.
Hence, for a given loadcase it provides information on the elements
that should be stiffened to increase the overall stiffness (and hence to
minimize the deflections) to that loadcase. The required request in
MSC.NASTRAN is
To illustrate this concept, consider the following springs in series. The goal is to reduce the tip deflection at grid
point 2. Without performing any calculation, it is quite obvious that stiffening K2 is more efficient than stiffening
K1. The next step is to calculate the strain energy and see if it also guides you in the same direction.
The deflections and element strain energy are
Since U2 is an order of magnitude greater than U1, clearly it is better to stiffen K2 than K1 to reduce the deflections
at the tip. The element strain energy distribution for a car model is shown below (courtesy of Lapcad Eng).
The strain energy density is an effective design tool for linear static analysis (SOL 101), buckling analysis (SOL
105 and SOL 106) and for dynamic linear modal analysis (SOL 103).
991
Second Edition
The ESE request outputs the following.
992
Second Edition
6.3.30 Error Estimation
6.3.30.1 GL, ML Analysis Error Estimation: h- or p- Refinement
Finite elements attempt model a continuum with discrete parameters, i.e. a finite number of DOFs. As long as the
following conditions are met
(i) the analysis is linear
(ii) the finite elements are based on the variational approach (or the Galerkin approach)
(iii) the geometry and material properties are represented accurately
(iv) continuity requirements of the shape functions are satisfied
(v) the integration of the discrete system of equations is accurate
(vi) all essential boundary conditions are associated with zero values
the work done by the total nodal loads due to nodal displacements as predicted by the discrete system will always
be less or equal to the exact value
{{f+P)T{u}}discrete ≤ {{f+P)T{u}}discrete
Hence, the discrete structural analysis based on a finite number of DOFs will always present a stiffer response than
the exact solution provided the above conditions are met. Hence, a finer mesh will generally be associated with a
more flexible response and hence a closer to exact approximation. The stiffer response occurs due to the fact the
that the chosen shape functions cannot represent all the possible modes of deformation of the structure. A useful
method of approximate error estimation is described as follows. The approximate order of error has been
established, but not the percentage of error itself relative to the exact solution. We shall illustrate the principle for
the in-plane displacement and strain or stress of a triangular (or rectangular for that matter) finite element.
{{f+P)T{u}}
Exact Solution
Element Size
h h/2
An estimate of the exact solution can be obtained by performing two linear analyses with either h- or p-refinement.
Employing h-refinement, we can establish the estimate of the exact displacement and stress (or strain) as
u exact − u 1 O(h ) 2 4u − u1
= = 4, hence u exact = 2
u exact − u 2 O ( h / 2) 2
3
σ exact − σ1 O( h )1
= = 2, hence σ exact = 2σ 2 − σ1
σ exact − σ 2 O( h / 2)1
where the subscripts 1 and 2 refer to the first and second (refined) analysis respectively. Hence, an approximate
absolute percentage error in the displacement and stress (or strain) is then given by
u exact − u 2 σ exact − σ 2
x 100% and x 100%
u exact σ exact
6.3.30.2 GNL, MNL Analysis Error Estimation: h- or p- Refinement
The mesh should be continuously refined until the variation is of no practical relevance.
993
Second Edition
6.3.30.3 Adaptive Analysis in MSC.NASTRAN with p-Elements
p-elements are elements that have variable degrees-of-freedom. The user can specify the polynomial order for each
element (in the 3 direction Px, Py, and Pz) and the program will generate the degrees-of-freedom required. The p-
elements are CBEAM, CTRIA, CQUAD, CHEXA, CPENTA and CTETRA. The properties of the p-elements will
be specified using the PSOLID, PSHELL, PBEAM, or PBEAML entry. These elements may use either isotropic
materials as defined on the MAT1 entry or anisotropic materials as defined on the MAT9 entry. One of the main
applications of p-version elements is detailed stress analysis. The p-elements have higher-order polynomials, which
provide better representation of complex stress fields. For these complex stress fields, the geometry, loads, and
boundary conditions must be represented accurately. This includes modelling fillets instead of sharp corners,
distributed loads and constraints instead of point loads and constraints, etc. A more detailed model leads to more
detailed results.
The accuracy of the analysis is controlled primarily by the polynomial level, not by the element size. Generally the
user needs to only use the minimum number of elements necessary to adequately model the geometry, independent
of expected result characteristics. Polynomials levels can then be assigned based on areas of the model in which the
user is interested, and areas of the model in which the user is not. (Of course the same polynomial level can be
assigned everywhere for a minimum of user involvement, but this is not as efficient.) If a more accurate answer is
necessary, the polynomial levels can be increased, either manually by the user or automatically by the program,
until the answers reach the specified accuracy, without changing the mesh. Adding degrees of freedom until the
error decreases to a specified level is known as adaptivity. By adding higher-order polynomials instead of refining
the mesh, a faster rate of convergence, and therefore less iteration, can be achieved.
In MSC.NASTRAN, p-elements have been added to complement the existing h-elements. The error estimator
requires only a single analysis, not the difference between two analyses. For linear elements, it is based on the grid-
point stress discontinuity; for higher polynomial orders, it considers the contribution of the additional terms for the
individual edge, face, and body functions. Therefore it provides efficient information because of the directional
sensitivity within the elements.
The main advantage of implementing p-elements in MSC.NASTRAN is the ability to combine them with the
existing h-elements for global/local analysis. The mesh could consist mostly of h-version elements, with p-version
elements in the areas of interest. This method of global/local interface is the most accurate, because it provides both
stiffness and loads information, rather than transferring just boundary displacements or tractions into the local
model. h-version elements still have several advantages. They are better for global behavior, such as loads analysis,
where the exact geometry is not used. They are better for strongly singular problems, such as nonlinear problems.
Approximations, such as sharp corners, point loads, point constraints, MPC's, etc. may be used. For a given
iteration, they tend to have shorter solution times and use less disk space. Finally, h-elements are a very mature
technology. Putting both approaches in the same program combines the advantages for general problems. The p-
elements may be connected directly to the existing h-elements, and continuity is automatically enforced. This
provides global/local analysis in a single run. Most general problems have both some global and some local
aspects; i.e., regions where h-elements and p-elements, respectively, are appropriate. Therefore the best approach is
combined h- and p-adaptivity, with different criteria in different parts of the model.
For p-version elements in detailed stress analysis, it is important to use distributed loads. Concentrated forces cause
singularities in the stress field, and therefore should be avoided. The PLOAD4 and GRAV entries can also be
applied to p-elements. The FORCE entry can be used, but should only be used where the adjacent elements have a
fixed p-level and the results are not of interest.
As with the loads, it is important to use distributed boundary conditions for p-version elements in detailed stress
analysis. Concentrated boundary conditions also cause singularities in the stress field and should be avoided. The
current SPC and SPC1 entries can be used, but should only be used to prevent rigid-body motion or used where the
adjacent elements have a fixed p-level and the results are not of interest.
994
Second Edition
Clearly, with p-elements, a different geometry definition is required. In linear elements, only the corner grid
definitions are required. In parabolic elements, the corner and mid-side grid definitions are required to map the
curvature of the surface. The Bulk Data entries to define the associativity between the finite element model and the
geometrical model are the FEEDGE and FEFACE entries for the edges and faces, respectively. Geometrical
curves and surfaces are defined by the GMCURV and GMSURF entries. The GMLOAD entry has been defined
to apply (non-singular) loads on these geometric surfaces for the p-version elements. The GMSPC and GMBC
entries have been defined to apply (non-singular) boundary constraints for the p-version elements.
In order for an element to be recognized as a p-version element, it must be assigned the polynomial values in the
new PVAL Bulk Data entry, which is referenced in the ADAPT Bulk Data entry. In order for the p-element to be
adaptive, the adaptivity parameters must be assigned in the ADAPT entry. The new PVAL Bulk Data entry assigns
the polynomial levels for the three directions to a single element or a set of elements, and is referenced in the
ADAPT Bulk Data entry. By default, the three directions are along the element edges. If a coordinate system is
specified, the polynomial level of each edge is set to a weighted combination of the coordinate directions. There
may be multiple PVALs with the same ID; all of the elements do not have to use the same entry. Each p-version
element must have a starting, minimum, and maximum PVAL ID; however, these do not need to be unique. Since
the polynomial levels can not decrease, the starting and minimum PVAL IDs can be the same. If the starting and
maximum PVAL IDs are the same, the element will have a fixed p-level. After the p-value distribution has been
defined, all of the values will be resolved to ensure displacement continuity. This includes selecting the highest p-
level specified for elements with common edges, decreasing the p-level for p-elements adjacent to h-elements, and
increasing the p-level on curved edges to adequately map them. The new ADAPT Bulk Data entry controls the p
adaptivity. The ADAPT Bulk Data entry is referenced with the ADAPT Case Control command, and there may
only be one unique ADAPT command in the Bulk Data file. The ADAPT entry contains the IDs for the starting,
minimum, and maximum p-value distributions and the maximum number of iterations. It also contains the
adaptivity parameters, which may be assigned differently to different sets of elements. These sets of elements do
not have to correspond with any sets used in the PVAL entries. The adaptivity type may be element-by-element p
adaptive, uniform p-adaptive, no change, or list of p-distributions. For each set in the ADAPT entry, the error
estimator method, error tolerance, and stress and strain tolerances are specified. If a p-version element is not
included in one of the sets, it is not adaptive. For a non-adaptive p-version solution, the ADAPT Bulk Data entry
may specify a maximum of one iteration, or may specify an adaptivity type of no change for all the elements. A
third way is to use the PSET Bulk Data entries, which have the same format as the PVAL entry, and reference
them with the ADAPT Case Control command.
Since the p-version analysis may have multiple iterations, the output control must have the capability of differing
among the iterations. For this reason, the OUTPUT Bulk Data entry was added. For a given set of elements, the
conventional displacements, stresses, and strains, as well as the new element errors and polynomial values, may be
printed, plotted, or punched for the given iteration. The OUTPUT entry is referenced by the DATAREC Case
Control command. The conventional Case Control commands still apply to all iterations, but the OUTPUT entry
has precedence. The p-version elements also tend to be larger than h-version elements, and have higher order
distributions of displacements, stresses, and strains. Therefore results only at the grid points are not adequate,
especially for most plotting packages, which use linear interpolation. For data recovery, the p-version elements are
divided into view-grids and view-elements in order to better visualize the results. The new OUTRCV Bulk Data
entry defines the number of view-elements in each element direction and the output coordinate system for the view-
grids and view-elements. The OUTRCV entry is referenced by the OUTRCV Case Control command. The
coordinates of the view-grids may be output using the VUGRID Case Control command.
When undertaking a h- or p- refinement, it is important to remember to also alter the boundary conditions and
constraints i.e. SPCs and RBEs such that the additional h-refined nodes and the p-refined mid-side nodes on the
edges and faces of the supports and constraints also participate.
995
Second Edition
996
Second Edition
6.3.30.4 Stress Discontinuity Error Estimator
Stress recovery concepts, namely

have been covered. Here we shall discuss error estimation based on grid and element stress discontinuities.
For discussion purposes, the averaging process used to compute the stress components at the grid points can be
represented in the form
6.3.30.4.1 Grid Point Stress Discontinuity
An estimate of the probable error in the stress component δg at the grid point is
Thus, the probable error in δg is the root mean square error in δei divided by √Ne. The probable error δg provides an
estimated error for each of the stress components. It is probably more useful and more desirable to combine these
six (in general there are six component stresses) estimated errors into a single representative error measure at each
grid point. An approximate root mean square value of the three estimated errors for each of the stress components
offers such a representative error measure.
where NC is the number of stress components, three for shells and six for solids.
Smaller values of δg and ERROR ESTIMATE are usually obtained for elements with vertex stresses, i.e. most
elements except CTRIA3 and CQUAD4 with STRESS (CENTER) option. CQUAD4 with STRESS (CORNER)
option will usually yield a smaller δg and ERROR ESTIMATE. These seemingly large values of error estimators
for CQUAD4 elements are not uncommon occurrences in statistical error measures. For example, the mean and
variance have direct analogies in engineering mechanics. The mean is analogous to the centroid of a body and is
thus a measure of where the mass is centered. The variance is the second moment about the mean, and it tends to be
997
Second Edition
small if the majority of the mass is concentrated about the centroid. As the mass is dispersed further from the
centroid, the moment of inertia tends to increase. If the mass is concentrated at the centroid (as it might be in some
idealized lumped mass models), the moment of inertia becomes zero. Thus, the error estimates for CQUAD4
elements tend toward larger values because the data used to compute the estimators is dispersed relatively far from
the mean. For those elements that provide stress data at vertices, the estimators tend toward smaller values because
the stress data tends to be concentrated about the mean in well-designed finite element models.
You are cautioned that very inaccurate values of these error estimators may occur at the edges of defined
SURFACEs and on the faces of defined VOLUMEs. In summary, the error estimators under discussion can, in
some cases, be highly inaccurate. Nevertheless, these data are quite useful when interpreted properly.
Provided that grid point stresses are requested (printed by GPSTRESS and plotted by STRFIELD, with SURFACE
and/or VOLUME definition), grid point stress discontinuities can be requested with GPSDCON = < Set of Surface
/ Volume IDs >. Note that GPSTRESS, STRFIELD and GPSDCON all reference the same set.
Note that stress continuity data is not provided when both plate and solid elements are connected to a grid point that
is involved in stress discontinuity calculations. The printed output is presented as follows.
998
Second Edition
6.3.30.4.2 Element Stress Discontinuity
The root mean square errors for each stress component of an element may be computed from the values of δei that
are computed for each of the Ng connected vertex grid points where δei = σe – σgi. This computation is done for
each stress component for all of the elements of interest.
It is desirable to combine these six (in general there are six stress component) estimated errors into a single
representative error estimate for each element. The root mean square value of the stress error estimates for each of
the stress components offers such a representative error measure.
Provided that grid point stresses are requested (printed by GPSTRESS and plotted by STRFIELD, with SURFACE
and/or VOLUME definition), element stress discontinuities can be requested with ELSDCON = < Set of Surface /
Volume IDs >. Note that GPSTRESS, STRFIELD and ELSDCON all reference the same set.
999
Second Edition
6.3.30.5 Hand Verification: Deriving Stresses From Forces (Axial, Moments, Shear and Torsion) in Beam
Elements and Stresses Due to External Loading of General Shell and Solid Continuum
6.3.30.5.1 Beam – Axial Force
Axial forces cause uniform longitudinal normal stresses according to σ = F/A (Engineers Axial Theory σ = F/A
= Edu/dx).
6.3.30.5.2 Beam – Bending Moment and Shear Force
Assuming linear elastic theory and small displacement theory (i.e. that plane sections remain plane and orthogonal
to the neutral axis on bending), bending moments cause longitudinal normal bending stresses varying linearly
across the section according to σ = My/I (Engineers Bending Theory σ/y = M/I = E/R = Ed2u/dx2), hence zero at
the neutral axis and maximum at the flanges.
Longitudinal normal stresses σ = My/I
Defining x as the longitudinal axis, the general symmetrical bending equation is
Mz My
σ= y+ z
I zz I yy
Whenever bending occurs about an unsymmetrical axis, the unsymmetrical bending equation should be used.
(M z I yy + M y I yz ) (M z I yz + M y I zz )
σ= y+
(I yy I zz − I 2yz ) (I yy I zz − I 2yz ) z
Shear forces cause vertical and complimentary longitudinal horizontal shear stresses varying parabolically across
the vertical dimension of the section according to τ = VQ/Ib (Engineers Shear Theory τ = VQ/(Ib) or on average
V/(GAs) = Gdu/dx) where b is the width, V is the shear force, I the second moment of area about the neutral axis
and Q the first moment of area about the neutral axis of the area away from the point of concern. The shear stress is
hence maximum at the neutral axis and is carried primarily by the web. Shear forces also cause horizontal and
complimentary longitudinal shear stresses varying linearly in the flange according to τ = VQ/Ib.
Vertical and complimentary longitudinal

shear stresses τ = VQ/Ib
1000
Second Edition
Horizontal and complimentary

longitudinal shear stresses τ = VQ/Ib
The shear deformation expression is often simplified from VQ/(GIb) to V/(GAs) i.e. V/(GKsA). Section 6.4.2.2
gives values of Ks for typical beam sections which could be used to derive averaged (not maximum) shear
stresses.
6.3.30.5.3 Circular Closed (Hollow or Solid) Beam – Torsional Moment
A member is subjected to torsion from a shear force when it is applied not at its shear center. For a round section
(hollow or solid), if plane and parallel cross sections remain plane and parallel, torsion causes complimentary
shear stresses (a state of pure shear) to develop at a radius r according to τ = Tr/J (Engineers Torsion Theory τ/r
= T/J = Gdφ/dx) where the torsional constant J is equal to the sections polar moment of inertia for this round
section. The maximum hence occurs at the outermost radius.
6.3.30.5.4 Non-circular Closed (Hollow) Beam – Torsional Moment
That of a thin-walled arbitrary closed cross-section, τ = T / (2Aet) where Ae is the area enclosed by mid thickness.
6.3.30.5.5 Non-circular Open Beam – Torsional Moment
The torsional stress distribution for a noncircular section is much more complicated with J often replaced by Kt.
Section 6.4.2.1 gives values of Kt for typical beam sections which could be used to derive torsional shear stresses
according to τ = function (T, Kt, geometry)26. The expression τ = Tr/Kt CANNOT be used for general non-circular
sections.
6.3.30.5.6 Cylinder – Internal and/or External Pressure
A capped cylinder subject to internal or external pressure will develop tangential (hoop), radial and longitudinal
normal stresses. Denoting pi and po as internal and external pressure, ri and ro as internal and external radii, and r as
the general radius, these stresses are
p i ri 2 − p o ro 2 − ri 2 ro 2 (p o − p i ) / r 2
σ tan gential =
ro − ri
2 2
p i ri 2 − p o ro 2 + ri 2 ro 2 (p o − p i ) / r 2
σ radial =
ro − ri
2 2
p i ri 2 − p o ro 2
σ longitudin al =
ro 2 − ri 2
26
ROARK, R.J. and YOUNG, W.C. Roark’s Formulas for Stress and Strain 7th Edition. McGraw-Hill, London.
1001
Second Edition
The tangential and radial stresses are a long way away from the end caps and the longitudinal stress is constant
along the length.
6.3.30.5.7 Thin Walled Cylinder – Internal Pressure
For a thin-walled cylinder with diameter d, and thickness t less than 1/20 of its radius, with negligible outside
pressure, the maximum tangential (positive for tension) and constant longitudinal (positive for tension) normal
stresses are
p i (d i + t )
σ tan gential , max =
2t
pd
σ longitudin al = i i
4t
whilst the radial normal stress would simply be the internal pressure (negative for compression) on the element on
the inside surface of the cylinder and zero on the element on the outside surface.
6.3.30.5.8 Thin Walled Sphere – Internal Pressure
For a thin-walled sphere with diameter d and thickness t, the biaxial (in two orthogonal directions) tangential
(positive for tension) normal stresses are
pd
σ tan gential , max = i
2t
whilst the radial normal stress would simply be the internal pressure (negative for compression) on the element on
the inside surface of the cylinder and zero on the element on the outside surface.
1002
Second Edition
6.4 Stiffness Element Cards
The basic MSC.NASTRAN element connectivity structure is shown below.
ELEMENT GRID
CONNECTION CARD
PROPERTY CARD
(HM: prop collector for scalar and beams
and comp collector for shells and solids)
MATERIAL CARD
(HM: mat collector)
Basic MSC.NASTRAN element and property card structure
For beams, the element definition and element stress recovery are performed in the element coordinate system.
For shells, the element definition and element stress recovery are performed in the element coordinate system by
default (but defined by MCID entry on element connection card; 0 for basic projected, > 0 for user
projected, < blank > for element coordinate system, > 0.0 and < 360.0 for angled from side n1-n2 of element).
For solid elements, the element definition and element stress recovery are performed in the basic coordinate
system by default (but defined on CORDM field of PSOLID; 0 for basic, > 0 for user-defined, -1 for element
coordinate system).
1003
Second Edition
6.4.1 Scalar CELAS Element
CELAS element is used to model springs (that provide translational or rotational stiffnesses) connecting single
DOFs at two grid points that should be coincident. If one of the grid points is omitted, then the spring is assumed to
be grounded (i.e. a grid which is constrained in displacement). As with any scalar element, the CELAS element
MUST BE DEFINED as a ZERO LENGTH element (as a scalar element should not have a dimension anyway),
and not one with a finite length. Otherwise, any forces applied to the grids by the scalar element WILL
INCORRECTLY induce moments on the structure if the direction of the scalar stiffness (and hence force) is not
parallel with the finite dimension. If the grids are not coincident, a difference in displacement may be caused by a
rigid body rotation. This situation causes forces in springs and a net moment on the structure, i.e. and internal
constraint. Internal constraints can be detected when there is a discrepancy between the OLOAD resultants and
SPCFORCE resultants. Although the results with internal constraints could be plausible for static linear analysis,
they can be terribly incorrect for eigenvalue analysis. For best practice, always utilize rigid elements to add finite
length, even if scalar stiffness parallel to dimension, note that CBUSH elements generated internal rigids.
Rigid
CELAS with CROD (parallel to rigid

element) defined on both coincident grids
The DOFs connected by the spring are in the coordinate system defined at the grids. It is convenient if the springs
are oriented parallel to the Basic System. In general the direction of the scalar stiffness value will not be coincident
with a global DOF. This necessitates the definition of a local coordinate system using CORD1R or CORD2R at the
grid where the scalar stiffness is required. This system should be specified in Field 7 of both connected GRID
cards. In such situations using a CROD element is sometimes easier than using a spring although with CROD
elements, coincident nodes cannot be defined.
$ BULK DATA
Structural
CELAS1 EID PID GA DOF C1 GB DOF C2 S
Damping GE
PELAS PID1 K1 PID2 K2 PID3 K3 PID4 K4
Structural
CELAS2 EID K GA DOF C1 GB DOF C2 S
Damping GE
When you use CELASi elements to represent concentrated springs between two components of translation, the
directions of the two components must be coaxial. Even small deviations in direction can induce a significant
moment to your model that does not exist in your physical structure. It is recommended that when a CELASi
element is used, the locations of the two end points be coincident in order to avoid this type of problem. If the two
end points are not coincident, you should consider using a CROD, CBUSH or CBUSH1D element instead. The
CELAS element has somewhat been superceded by the CBUSH and CBUSH1D element to avoid problems
with the generation of internal constraints.
It is worth noting that the equivalent stiffness of springs in parallel is the addition of the individual stiffnesses and
the equivalent stiffness of springs in series is the inverse of the addition of the inverse of the individual stiffnesses.
The force in CELAS spring element is calculated as F = K(u1-u2), and hence the sign is dependent upon how the
element topology is defined, and not on the physical sense of element force, whether tension or compression. This
is not the case in other elements such as CROD, CBAR and CBEAM. The output from the ELFORCE (PRINT)
request is as follows. For tension
U
U2 U1 positive
1004
Second Edition
6.4.2 One-Dimensional Element Cards
6.4.2.1 Axial and Torsional Stiffness CROD, CONROD, CTUBE Elements
A CROD element connects two grid points straight and can provide axial and torsional stiffnesses, hence providing
stiffness in only two DOFs at either grid. No bending nor shear stiffnesses are provided. Also, CROD elements do
not consider torsional inertia in its mass matrix. NSM is the non-structural mass per unit length.
∫r dA = πR4/2.
2
For solid circular sections, the torsional constant Kt be equal to the polar moment of inertia, J =
For thin circular tube sections, Kt = J = π(r14-r24)/2.
For non-circular sections, the torsional constant is not be the polar moment of area. Equivalent torsional constants
Kt for non-circular sections must be used. An approximation to the torsional constant of noncircular thin walled
section depends on whether the thin beam section is closed or open. A thin walled closed section such as a SHS
(∫ )
will have Kt = 4A e2 / ds / t where Ae is enclosed area by the mid thickness and the integral is carried out over the
circumference. A thin walled open section such as an I-, T- or a channel should be treated as a series of rectangles
each contributing to Kt = (1/3)(ds)(t3).
1 b  b 4  3
For general rectangles, K t = 1 − 0.63 1 −  b b max .
3  b max  12b 4max 
1 b  3
For narrow rectangles (bmax >> 2b), K t = 1 − 0.63  b b max .
3 b max 
1
For very narrow rectangles (bmax >> b), K t = b 3 b max .
3
For squares, Kt = 0.1406b4.
For equilateral solid triangles, Kt = 3b 4 / 80
1005
Second Edition
For general cross sections, extruding a solid or shell model into a beam in an FE program and subjecting it to a
torsion, the torsional constant K can be found. To do this, from τ/r = T/J = Gdφ/dx it can be deduced that the
rotation of a bar in constant (throughout the length of the beam) torsion T is φ = TL/GJ and replacing J with Kt, the
torsional constant Kt can be found. Ensure that there is no other deformation (shear, bending, axial) which
contribute to the total deformation, otherwise they must be removed. A suitable system will simply be a encastre
cantilever (which is thus statically determinate as far as the equivalent beam is concerned) subject to a torsion at the
free end. Hence model the complicated model with one end fixed in all DOFs and the other subject to a torsion T.
Of course there will be many forms of deformation (be they axial, bending, shear or torsion) in the local elements
of the complicated model, but the equivalent beam idealization will only be subject to a constant torsion T. Hence
the resulting twist at the free end φ will be the deformation that will be observed in the idealized beam model due to
only torsional deformation and φ = TL/GJ can be used to find J (or Kt).
$ BULK DATA
CROD EID PID GA GB
PROD PID MID Area J C NSM
The CONROD element defines the axial and torsional stiffness in the connection card itself.
$ BULK DATA
CONROD EID GA GB MID Area J C NSM
The CTUBE element defines the axial and torsional stiffnesses by specifying the outer diameter and the thickness
of a circular tube with a PTUBE entry. The element coordinate system is defined by the direction of the two grids.
1006
Second Edition
A positive force is tensile by definition and the positive torsion is represented by torsion in a direction according to
the Right Hand Rotation Rule about the longitudinal axes directed outwards. These elements are useful to define
truss elements where there is no bending. The output from the ELFORCE (PRINT) request is as follows.
1007
Second Edition
6.4.2.2 CBAR Element
A CBAR element is a straight prismatic element and provides axial, torsional, bending stiffness in two
perpendicular planes and shear stiffness in two perpendicular planes, hence providing stiffness in all six DOFs on
either grid. Note that CBAR elements do not consider torsional inertias. It is derived from classical beam theory
(which assumes that plane sections remain plane in deformation). If this is not deemed to be the case, shell or solids
should be used. Since, plane sections must remain plane in deformation, torsional stiffening of out of plane cross-
sectional warping is neglected. Also, since the shear center and neutral axis must coincide, the CBAR element
cannot model warping of open sections. NSM is the non-structural mass per unit length.
The CBAR element provides exact results for end loads of any kind, i.e. no element loading. Hence, it models
linear bending moment variation exactly. Thus its transverse displacement interpolation function is a cubic
polynomial since the bending moment is the second derivative of the transverse displacement in linear beam
bending theory. Hence, if there are internal point loads in a structural beam member, discretized the member with a
number of finite CBAR elements so that at least all the loads occur at the ends of the CBAR elements. This will
prove to yield exact results for a static analysis since the displaced shape for sections with a linear variation of
bending moment is cubic polynomial. For modal analyses, it is prudent to use a finer mesh as the mode shapes are
not cubic polynomials, in fact are not polynomials at all.
The element coordinate system is defined by either an orientation vector or an orientation node, both of which
defines a plane in which bending with the second moment of area of I1 occurs. Hence, if I1 is the major principal
second moment of area, the orientation node will define the minor axis of bending. The element coordinate system
is then defined as shown.
Some of the connections of the bar element can be removed by pin-flags. Pin flags can be specified for translational
degrees-of-freedom (creating sliding joints), or to rotational degrees-of-freedom (creating hinges). Note that the
joints created by the pin-flags occur at the ends of the CBAR’ s neutral axis, not at the grid points. This is akin to
disconnecting the bar element from its supporting structure and connecting only certain DOFs. Hence, rotational
pin-flags is akin to having two coincident nodes at the end of the bar element (one attached to the bar and the other
to the supporting structure) with only the translational DOFs constrained between them.
The neutral axis may be offset from the grid point, which is akin to attaching a rigid link between the end of the bar
to the support. This is useful to model stiffened plates or grid-works.
$ BULK DATA
CBAR EID PID GA GB X1 X2 X3
PA PB W1A W2A W3A W1B W2B W3B
CBAR EID PID GA GB G0
1008
Second Edition

PBAR PID MID Area I1 I2 J NSM
C1 C2 D1 D2 E1 E2 F1 F2
K1 K2 I12
X1, X2 and X3 define the orientation vector components in the displacement coordinate system of grid G1. The
alternate is to define an orientation grid id G0, but this method is not recommended as alterations to the model will
cause the definition to defer. PA and PB are the pin-flags. The Wij are the components of the offset vectors in the
displacement coordinate system of G1 and G2. The offset is effectively a rigid element from the grid to the element
end. If the CBAR is offset from the grid points and the components of orientation vector are entered (i.e. field 6 of
the CBAR entry is a real number), then the tail of orientation vector is at end A, not grid point GA. Conversely, if
the orientation vector is defined with the use of another grid point G0 (field 6 of the CBAR entry is an integer
number), then the orientation vector is defined as the line originating at grid point GA, not end A, and passing
through G0. The Ci, Di, Ei and Fi are the stress recovery coefficients for stress estimation using bending σ = My/I
and from the axial forces. Non-symmetric beams will have I12 component. In a beam with a symmetric section, the
bending properties depend only in I1 and I2 since they correspond to the principal axes. A load in plane 1 or plane
2 will cause a deflection in only plane 1 or 2. When the section is not symmetric, and is loaded in either plane 1 or
plane 2, there is a component of deflection orthogonal to the loading. This occurs because the loading is not in the
principal planes. In this case, the bending properties depend on I1, I2 and I12. If in this non-symmetric section, the
principal planes were found (by Mohr Circle since I is a second order tensor) and the loading was applied in one of
these principal planes, then there will be no orthogonal component to the deflection.
1009
Second Edition
1010
Second Edition
1011
Second Edition
Ki are the area factors for shear deformation. Shear stress on a beam is given by τ = VQ/Ib. A simplified expression
would simply be τ = V/As where the shear area As is obtained by multiplying the shear area factor Ks to the total
area. The shear area factors Ki are as follows.
Solid Rectangular K1 = K2 = 5/6

6
Solid Circular K1 = K2 =
ν2
7+
(1 + ν )2
CHS K1 = K2 = 1/2
I- and T- Beams
Major Axis K1 = (5.72/6 to 5.81/6) (Aweb / A)
Minor Axis K2 = (5/6) (Aflange / A)
For those rare structures where the shear deformation is very important it may be necessary to use a more exact
value for the area. The following gives formulae for F for the cross-sections shown below noting that
1012
Second Edition
The shear stiffness of a castellated beam, or of a truss modelled by a single beam element, is significantly less than
for the equivalent solid beam and so shear deformations always need to be allowed for, even with slender beams. It
is often convenient in a large analysis to represent trusses by beams with shear flexibility. The axial stiffnesses, EA,
of the chords of a truss determine the bending stiffness, whereas the axial stiffnesses of bracing members, or the
flexural stiffnesses, EI, of all members, control the shear stiffness. For all trusses and frames with parallel chords of
area AF and centroids separated by b, the flexural stiffness EΙ = EAF.b2/2. The shear stiffnesses and shear area
factors for trusses and for Vierendeel frames are presented.
1013
Second Edition
1014
Second Edition
If the shear stiffnesses of the members and joints are also considered, then the expressions for Vierendeel frames
becomes
where S is the rotational stiffness of the joint, and KF and KB are the shear area factors associated with AF and AB
respectively and w and h are defined on the joint figure below.
For a Vierendeel frame comprising flanged sections with a common web thickness, much of the shear flexibility
results from joint deformation. For the joint shown, S, KFAF and KBAB are given by:
1015
Second Edition
It should be noted that although a frame analysis would not normally include joint deformations, it would include
the shear deformations between the face of the perpendicular members and their centre lines. If the above value of
K is rewritten as
Whether such a model over or under estimates the shear deformations depends on the last term of the denominator
and hence the ratios w/a and h/b.
For general cross sections, extruding a solid or shell model into a beam in an FE program and subjecting it to a
shear force, the shear area can be found. To do this, from τ = V/As = Gdu/dx it can be deduced that the shear
deflection of a beam in constant (throughout the length of the beam) shear V is u = VL/(GAs), and hence the shear
area As can be found. Ensure that there is no other deformation (bending, axial, torsion) which contribute to the
total deformation, otherwise they must be removed. A suitable system will simply be a encastre cantilever (which is
thus statically determinate as far as the equivalent beam is concerned) subject to a concentrated force at the free
end. Hence model the complicated model with one end fixed in all DOFs and the other subject to a force V. Of
course there will be many forms of deformation (be they axial, bending, shear or torsion) in the local elements of
the complicated model, but the equivalent beam idealization will only be subject to a constant shear force V and a
linearly varying bending moment. Hence the resulting deflection at the free end will be the deformation that will be
observed in the idealized beam model due to both shear and bending deformations, the cantilever will not be
subject to any axial nor torsional forces. The component of the deflection which is due to bending deformation
must be known. This must be calculated from classical methods, i.e. ubending = VL3/(3EI) where I is calculated from
a closed form formula. The remaining deflection after ubending is subtracted is the shear deflection which can then be
used to back calculate the shear area As from u = VL/(GAs).
The PBARL is an alternative method of defining the PBAR entry. The PBARL Bulk Data entry allows you to
input cross section types along with their characteristic dimensions. You can choose from19 different cross section
shapes. These shapes are as follows: ROD, TUBE, I, CHAN (channel), T, BOX, BAR (rectangle), CROSS, H, T1,
I1, CHAN1, Z, CHAN2, T2, BOX1, HEXA (hexagon), HAT (hat section), and HAT1. Because of the knowledge
of the section type, the stress recovery points are automatically defined.
1016
Second Edition
$ BULK DATA
Group
PBARL PID MID TYPE
(MSCBML0)
DIM1 DIM2 DIM3 DIM4 DIM5 DIM6 DIM7 DIM8
DIM9 etc.. NSM
The output from the ELFORCE (PRINT) request is as follows.
1017
Second Edition
6.4.2.3 CBEAM Element
A CBEAM element includes the CBAR element capabilities and separate neutral axis and axis of shear centers,
effect of cross-sectional warping on torsional stiffness (as is important in the case of open sections), cross-sectional
properties specified on both ends and interior point (tapered element), effect of taper on traverse shear stiffness
(shear relief), separate axis for the center of non-structural mass and torsional inertias are included i.e. can be offset
from shear center (for dynamic analyses) and also has nonzero rotational mass moment of inertia about its neutral
axis. The CBEAM element can be loaded at interior points by means of the PLOAD1 card. But again, the CBEAM
element is only exact if loads are applied at its ends, i.e. it models a linear bending moment distribution. NSM is
the non-structural mass per unit length. The element x-axis is along the shear center unlike CBAR where it is along
the neutral axis.
$ BULK DATA
CBEAM EID PID GA GB X1 X2 X3
SA SB
PBEAM PID MID A(A) I1(A) I2(A) I12(A) J(A) NSM(A)
C1(A) C2(A) D1(A) D2(A) E1(A) E2(A) F1(A) F2(A)
K1 K2 I12
… … … … … … … …
S0 X/XB A I1 I2 I12 J NSM
C1 C2 D1 D2 E1 E2 F1 F2
… … … … … … … …
K1 K2 S1 S2 NSI(A) NSI(B) CW(A) CW(B)
M1(A) M2(A) M1(B) M2(B) N1(A) N2(A) N1(B) N2(B)
For the CBAR element, the element stiffness matrix is generated directly from the input data. For instance, if I1 for
a CBAR element is zero, then the corresponding element stiffness matrix term is null, which is not necessarily a
problem. On the other hand, the CBEAM element uses the input data to generate an element flexibility matrix,
which must be inverted to produce the element stiffness matrix. Therefore, positive values for A, I1, and I2 must be
entered.
One difference between the CBAR element and the CBEAM element, that is not obvious, is the default values used
for the transverse shear flexibility. For the CBAR element, the default values for K1 and K2 are infinite, which is
equivalent to zero transverse shear flexibility. For the CBEAM element, the default values for K1 and K2 are both
1.0, which includes the effect of transverse shear in the elements. If you want to set the transverse shear flexibility
to zero, which is the same as the CBAR element, use a value of 0.0 for K1 and K2.
Analogous to PBARL, PBEAML can be used to generate the section properties from the dimensions.
1018
Second Edition
6.4.2.4 CBEND Element
A CBEND element is a circular arc between 2 grids with extensional, torsional, bending stiffness in two
perpendicular planes and shear stiffness in two perpendicular planes. The PBEND card has two alternate forms,
corresponding to a curved beam of arbitrary cross-section or a curved pipe (tube). The curved beam has its
principal bending axes parallel and perpendicular to the plane of the element, the geometric centre of the element
may be offset in two perpendicular directions, the offset of the neutral axis from the geometric centre due to
curvature is calculated automatically. For the curved beam form of the element a user override is possible. For the
curved pipe form, the effect of internal pressure on stiffness and stress can be accounted for. Axial stresses can be
output at four cross-sectional points at each end of the element. Forces and moments are output at both ends.
Distributed loads may be applied along the element using the PLOAD1 card. NSM is the non-structural mass per
unit length.
1019
Second Edition
6.4.3 Two-Dimensional Element Cards
For linear analysis, shells assume the classical assumptions of this plate behavior, i.e. the thickness must be much
smaller than the other dimensions, the deflection at the mid-surface must be small compared to its thickness and the
mid-surface remains unstrained during bending by lateral loads.
The force, moment and stress are output. The Element Coordinate System is defined implicitly by the locations and
order of the connected grid points in the Element Coordinate System. The element x-direction is defined by a
vector from the first to the second grid point defined in the connectivity card. The element y-direction is
perpendicular to the x-direction, and lies in the plane of the element. The element z-direction is defined by the
right-hand rule. It is not really necessary to orient the X- and Y- axes of the elements in a common fashion so long
as the element stresses are transformed into global coordinates in the post-processor. But it is always necessary to
orient the Z-axis of the elements consistently as the stresses at the top and bottom surfaces are viewed separately.
Forces and moments are output at the element center whilst stresses are output at distances Z1 and Z2 from the
centroid surface. If Zi = ½ thickness (by default), then the stresses are output at the surfaces.
6.4.3.1 Transverse Bending, Transverse Shear and In-Plane Membrane (Plane Stress or Plane Strain)
CQUAD4, CQUAD8, CTRIA3, CTRIA6 Elements
In general, the quadrilateral elements CQUAD4 and CQUAD8 should be preferred over the triangular elements
CTRIA3 and CTRIA6, which are stiffer particularly for membrane strain. The latter are mainly useful to model
portions of a structure when quadrilateral elements are impractical. Shell elements have 5 DOFs at each grid point,
i.e. they do not have in plane rotational freedoms. Variable thickness can be defined, hence tapering is possible. For
CTRIA6 and CQUAD8, the mid-side grid point need not be located on a straight line joining the adjacent corner
points (because of the nature of isoparametric elements), hence these elements can model curved surfaces.
The shell elements have the capabilities of membrane stiffness, transverse bending stiffness and transverse shear
stiffness. The membrane stiffness can be calculated using either the plane stress (default) or plane strain theories.
Any of these capabilities may be omitted by the user. The elements CQUAD4, CQUAD8, CTRIA3 and CTRIA6
employ either the PSHELL or PCOMP property cards. Both the PSHELL and PCOMP cards can refer to either
MAT1, MAT2 or MAT8. (Note that PSOLID cards refer to MAT1 or MAT9). The PSHELL card is described.
$ BULK DATA
PSHELL PID MID1 T MID2 12I/T3 MID3 TS/T NSM
Z1 Z2 MID4
MID1 - Material for membrane stiffness.

MID2 - Material for bending stiffness.
MID3 - Material for transverse shear stiffness (thick plate theory for thicker shells)
MID4 - Material for coupling between membrane and bending deformation to model offsets.
12I/T3 is the bending stiffness parameter, by default 1.0
TS/T is the transverse shear thickness divided by the membrane thickness, by default .833333
NSM is the non-structural mass per unit area
For solid homogenous plates, the default values of 12I/T3 and TS/T are correct. To obtain pure membrane
behaviour only the MID1 should be specified; To obtain pure plate bending behaviour only the MID2 and MID3
fields should be specified. In reality, transverse load is resisted by both bending and membrane action, the latter
when the geometry is curved or becomes curved as the nonlinear analysis progresses. Membrane action is the
tension that occurs in the plane of the plate once some deformation has taken place, and this acts to resist the
transverse force. For thin shells, membrane action is stiff compared to bending. Finally, transverse shear flexibility
should be omitted only for comparison with academic solutions; Including the transverse shear flexibility always
1020
Second Edition
gives a better answer for real-world structures. An element with shear flexibility will deflect more than an element
without shear flexibility, hence the term shear flexibility instead of shear stiffness. The thicker the plate, the more
significant is the contribution from the shear flexibility term, analogous to short deep beams. But for thin or curved
surfaces, it is advisable not to use MID3.
The MID4 is simulating a similar effect to having an offset i.e. if you apply a tension (membrane load) it will cause
bending deflections if you have this material set. It is rarely used but can be automatically generated on an
unbalanced PCOMP entry. This has nothing to do with differential stiffness, which is accounted for nevertheless
(with appropriate elements). Other methods of modelling plate offsets are by using ZOFFS on the element card or
by using explicit rigid RBAR elements. Of the three methods MID4, ZOFFS and RBAR, the recommended
approach is by using ZOFFS.
The PCOMP property card is used for modelling a composite material consisting of layers. This information is
used internally within NASTRAN to compute equivalent PSHELL cards.
6.4.3.1.1 CQUAD4 Element
CQUAD4 element is a modified isoparametric element. Its membrane part uses reduced order integration for in-
plane shear. Its bending part gives nearly exact results when the curvature varies linearly over the surface of the
element. This element is the most commonly used element in NASTRAN. CQUAD4 are better for doubly-curved
shells such as spheres. It is a robust element and behaves well when its shape is irregular. For example good results
have been obtained with skew angles up to 45 degrees. There is no aspect ratio limit. The corner points are not
required to lie in the same plane. It is recommended to avoid warping angles larger than 10 degrees.
$ BULK DATA
THETA OR
CQUAD4 EID PID G1 G2 G3 G4 ZOFFS
MCID
T1 T2 T3 T4
Ti represents the shell thickness at the 4 corners, which can be omitted, in which case they will be set to the
thickness defined in the property entry card. ZOFFS is used to model the plate offset. A positive ZOFFS implies
that the element reference plane is offset a distance ZOFFS from the grid points along the positive z-axis of the
element coordinate system. Naturally, MID1 and MID2 must be specified if offsets are used.
It is important to note that the forces generated for the elements are forces per unit length. A common error for new
users is to assume that the force shown in the output is the total force acting on the element—it is not! It is the force
per unit length.
1021
Second Edition
6.4.3.1.2 CQUAD8 Element
The CQUAD8 is a modified isoparametric element with four corner grid points and four edge grid points.
Compared with the CQUAD4 element, the CQUAD8 element usually provides greater accuracy at the same cost
for flat plates and for singly-curved shells (such as a cylinder). The CQUAD4 however tends to perform better for
doubly-curved shells (such as a sphere). For modelling cylindrical surfaces, the CQUAD8 should not sweep more
than 30 degrees of the surface. CQUAD8 for mesh transition is not recommended. Deleting mid-side nodes is NOT
recommended. For the CQUAD8 elements, if mid-side nodes are present, they should be located within the middle
third of the edge. If a mid-side node is located at one-fourth the distance of the edge as measured from either corner
node on the edge, the internal strain field becomes singular at the corners of the element. For best results, it is
recommended that the mid-side node be located as close to the center of the edge as possible. If mid-side nodes are
desired, the general recommendation is to include all of them. A CQUAD8 element with mid-side nodes deleted is
excessively stiff and therefore is inferior to a CQUAD4 element.
$ BULK DATA
CQUAD8 EID PID G1 G2 G3 G4 G5 G6
THETA OR
G7 G8 T1 T2 T3 T4 ZOFFS
MCID
QUAD8 is better than QUAD4 when there is in-plane bending because QUAD8 can curve because of the existence
of mid-side nodes and its isoparametric formulation whilst the QUAD4 is straight at its edges, exhibiting shear
locking behavior. QUAD8 is better than QUAD4 when there is out-of-plane bending because the stress recovery is
linear (σx in x) in QUAD8 whilst constant in QUAD4.
6.4.3.1.3 CTRIA3 Element
CTRIA3 element is a constant strain, constant curvature triangle. CTRIA3 elements have constant membrane
stresses. They are therefore not suitable for modelling areas with stress gradients (for example in the web of an I-
beam) and SHOULD BE MINIMIZED. Quadrilateral elements (CQUAD4, CQUAD8) or CTRIA6 triangles are
preferable. The primary application is to model portions of the structure where quadrilaterals are impractical, such
as the center of a circular plate. Avoid using CTRIA3 in locations where the membrane stresses are changing
rapidly, for example, in the web of an I-beam. Since CTRIA3 has constant membrane stresses, a large number of
them may be needed to obtain acceptable accuracy. It is better to use quadrilateral elements or CTRIA6 elements.
In fact, two CTRIA3 is not better than one QUAD4. To illustrate this, consider the membrane CQUAD4, which has
8 DOFs, i.e. capable of representing 8 independent deformation states, 3 of which are rigid body modes, leaving 5
independent stress-inducing deformation states. Contrast with the membrane CTRIA3, which has 6 DOFs, i.e.
capable of representing 6 independent deformation states, 3 of which are rigid body modes, leaving 3 independent
stress-inducing deformation states. Hence, two deformation states cannot be represented accurately by the CTRIA3
that can be by the CQUAD4.
$ BULK DATA
THETA OR
CTRIA3 EID PID G1 G2 G3 ZOFFS
MCID
T1 T2 T3
Ti represents the shell thickness at the 4 corners, which can be omitted, in which case they will be set to the
thickness defined in the property entry card.
6.4.3.1.4 CTRIA6 Element
CTRIA6 is a linear strain, linear curvature triangle with 3 corner nodes and 3 mid-side nodes. It is used in a similar
way to CTRIA3, in areas where QUAD elements are unsuitable, in meshes with other elements having edge grids.
1022
Second Edition
6.4.3.2 In-Plane Shear and Extension CSHEAR Elements
The CSHEAR element is a quadrilateral with 4 grid points that supports in-plane shear force only. It is used in the
analysis of thin reinforced panels, especially if the panels are curved or buckled. The panels are then modeled by
CROD elements carrying extensional loads and CSHEAR elements carrying in-plane shear. The CSHEAR element
can also carry extensional force between adjacent grid points using the optional parameters F1 and F2 on the
PSHEAR card. This offers an efficient way to model the stiffness of the panel for extensional loads. Typically you
use the CSHEAR element in situations where the bending stiffness and axial membrane stiffness of the plate is
negligible. The use of CQUAD4 element in such situations results in an overly stiff model. The most important
application of the CSHEAR element is in the analysis of thin reinforced plates and shells, such as thin aircraft skin
panels. In such applications, reinforcing rods (or beams) carry the extensional load, and the CSHEAR element
carries the in-plane shear. This is particularly true if the real panel is buckled or if it is curved. Do not use plate or
shell elements (CQUADi, CTRIAi) in stiffened shell structures with very thin panels that can buckle. Shear panels
(CSHEAR) should be used in this case or in any situation where direct stresses cannot be supported, such as in a
very thin curved panel.
$ BULK DATA
CSHEAR EID PID G1 G2 G3 G4
PSHEAR PID MID T NSM F1 F2
The optional parameters F1 and F2 on the PSHEAR entry are useful in representing an effective stiffness of the
panel for extensional loads by means of equivalent rods on the perimeter of the element.
6.4.3.3 CRACK2D
The CRAC2D element is used to model surfaces with a discontinuity due to a crack.
1023
Second Edition
6.4.4 Three-Dimensional Element Cards
Solid elements connect only translational DOFs at grid points.
$ BULK DATA
PSOLID PID MID CORDM IN STRESS ISOP FCNT
CORDM is the material coordinate system

IN is the integration network
STRESS is the location for stress output
ISOP is the integration scheme
FCNT is the fluid element flag, SMECH for structural element and PFLUID for fluid element.
Unlike plate and shell elements where stress components are always recorded in the element coordinate system, the
stresses for the HEXA and PENTA elements are recorded in the material coordinate system. The user has a several
ways of defining the material coordinate system specified on Field 4, either the Basic Coordinate System (0 or
blank as default), the Element Coordinate System (-1), or a Local Coordinate System (Integer > 0).
By default, the stress output for the solid elements is at the center and at each of the corner points. For CHEXA and
CPENTA, if no mid-side nodes are used, you may request the stress output at the Gauss points instead of the corner
points by setting Field 6 of the PSOLID entry to “GAUSS” or 1. Gauss point output is available for the CTETRA
element with or without mid-side nodes.
The default integration schemes may be overridden with Field 5 and Field 7 of the PSOLID entry. In general, it is
recommended that you use the default value. An override of the default values is available if you are familiar with
element theory and have a particular modelling need; otherwise, use the defaults.
1024
Second Edition
6.4.4.1 CHEXA8 or CHEXA20 Element
The six-faced CHEXA element has 8 corner nodes forming a rectangular brick shaped element. If mid-side nodes
are specified, then there will be an additional 12 grids. This element is more recommended than other degenerate
solid elements. Its performance degrades when subjected to prominent bending. The mid-side grids G9 to G20 are
optional. Any or all of them may be deleted, but not recommended. The equations are modified to take into account
the available grids. Of course, the corner grids cannot be omitted. As in the case of plate elements, if mid-side
nodes are present for the solid elements, they should be located as close to the center of the edge as possible.
$ BULK DATA
CHEXA EID PID G1 G2 G3 G4 G5 G6
G7 G8 G9 G10 G11 G12 G13 G14
G15 G16 G17 G18 G19 G20
6.4.4.2 CPENTA6 or CPENTA15 Element
The five-faced CPENTA element has 6 corner grids and has 9 available mid-side edge grids, forming a wedge
shape. It is commonly used to model transitions from solids to shells. The triangular faces should be on the exposed
faces of the shells, to avoid excessive stiffness. Any or all of the mid-side grids may be omitted, but is not
recommended.
$ BULK DATA
CPENTA EID PID G1 G2 G3 G4 G5 G6
G7 G8 G9 G10 G11 G12 G13 G14
G15
6.4.4.3 CTETRA4 or CTETRA10 Element
The four-faced CTETRA is a quadratic (linear strain) isoparametric solid element with 4 corner grids and 6
available mid-side grid points. A linear (constant strain) CTETRA may be obtained by omitting the edge grid
points. Partial omission of edge grid points is allowed, but is not recommended. The recommended application of
the CTETRA element is to fill in odd-shaped holes in meshes made with CHEXA and CPENTA elements. If large
portions of the model must be modeled using CTETRA elements, then a very fine mesh density is recommended in
regions of steep stress gradients. If you use edge nodes, it is recommended that you include all six nodes. The
accuracy of the element degrades if some but not all of the edge grid points are used. In bending situations, two or
more tetrahedrons are required through the wall thickness to capture behaviour. It is a good modelling practice to
keep the use of CTETRA4 TO A MINIMUM, especially in the areas of high stress. CTETRA10 should be used
as the standard TETRA element, even before h-refinement is undertaken as CTETRA4 is overly stiff as it is a
constant strain element. Studies show that properly converged second order CTETRA10 can provide the same
accuracy as a linear brick element. CTETRA has the advantage of being very easy to mesh with an automated mesh
generator and is the norm for CFD type applications. A skin of TRIAs are generated with an automated mesh
generator on defined surface geometry, then the tetra mesh is employed to fill the volume. The skin can be
remained to act for stress recovery purposes on the surface of the component where the stress is most likely to be
the highest. Note that the thickness of the skin is usually in the order of around 0.01mm for standard components
and connections of 1m nominal dimensions say.
6.4.4.4 CRACK3D
The CRAC3D element is used to model volumes with a discontinuity due to a crack.
1025
Second Edition
6.5 Mass Element Cards
The CMASS1 (with PMASS) and CMASS2 elements define a scalar mass element between two grid points (and
across particular DOF pairs in the CD displacement coordinate system of the grid point). The grid IDs G1 and G2
must be distinct, however a zero or blank field will indicate a grounded terminal.
$ BULK DATA
Grid Grid
CMASS1 EID PID DOF C1 DOF C2
ID G1 ID G2
PMASS PID1 M1 PID2 M2 PID3 M3 PID4 M4
$ BULK DATA
Grid Grid
CMASS2 EID M DOF C1 DOF C2
ID G1 ID G2
The CONM1 element allows input of a fully coupled 6 x 6 mass matrix. Half the terms are defined and symmetry is
assumed.
$ BULK DATA
Grid
CONM1 EID CID M11 M21 M22 M31 M32
ID
M33 M41 M42 M43 M44 M51 M52 M53
M54 M55 M61 M62 M63 M64 M65 M66
The CONM2 element allows the specification of a concentrated mass at a grid point. This element also allows the
definition of a center of gravity offset from the grid point and moments and products of inertia about the center of
gravity.
$ BULK DATA
Grid
CONM2 EID CID M X1 X2 X3
ID
I11 I21 I22 I31 I32 I33
The mass matrix [M] is automatically computed from
(i) the mass density (mass per unit volume) in the property cards
(ii) the non-structural mass (mass/length or mass/area) in the property cards
(iii) concentrated mass elements
The mass matrix [M] is obtained by either the lumped mass method or the coupled mass method (based on the
classical consistent mass method). The lumped mass model contains uncoupled components of translational mass
and uncoupled components of rotational or torsional inertia components. The lumped mass model thus generates
diagonal mass matrices. The coupled mass method on the other hand contains coupled components of mass
between translational DOFs and coupled components of inertia between rotational DOFs, but no coupling between
translational and rotational DOFs. The coupled mass matrix is thus not diagonal. It formulates the mass matrix by a
procedure similar to the formulation of the stiffness matrix by applying unit accelerations at successive nodal
freedoms and investigating the force generated at all the freedoms. Although the coupled mass method is more
accurate, the lumped mass method is generally preferred for its computational speed. Coupled mass formulation is
especially more accurate to model high frequency modes. To specify coupled mass rather than the default lumped
mass formulation,
1026
Second Edition
$ BULK DATA
PARAM, COUPMASS, 1
The dynamic mass often includes the medium surrounding the structure. For instance, in the analysis of offshore
gravity platforms, some degree of the mass of the water surrounding the shafts must be included within the mass.
Noting that the mass acts in 3 translational orthogonal directions (likewise inertia acts about 3 orthogonal axes), it
is essential that the correct component be modeled. The added mass on the shafts is a horizontal mass component
whilst the added mass on the base of the gravity base structure is a vertical mass component. The inclusion of
added masses on the dynamic model also means that a uniform global acceleration applied to all parts of the
structure to model gravitational force cannot be employed, as the added mass will incorrectly increase the weight of
the structure. Instead, the gravitational force must be modeled using explicit nodal loads or more accurately,
gravitational accelerations applied to a set of masses that excludes the added masses.
Another important consideration when modelling non-structural mass is that if rigid links are used to model the
center of gravity of the non-structural mass from the structure, then a coupled mass formulation (kinematically
equivalent mass matrix) must be used. This is because if lumped mass formulation is used, the rigid links simply
will transfer the non-structural mass onto the structure, and hence effectively not incorporating the offset. This will
cause significant errors in the lowest frequencies 27.
27
1027
Second Edition
6.6 Damping Element Cards
6.6.1 Viscous Damping Elements CDAMP and CVISC
The CDAMP1 (with PDAMP) and CDAMP2 elements define a scalar damping between two grid points (and
across particular DOF pairs in the CD displacement coordinate system of the grid point). The damping constant is
expressed in units of force/velocity. The grid ids G1 and G2 must be distinct, however a zero or blank field will
indicate a grounded terminal. In general the direction of the scalar viscous damping will not be coincident with a
global DOF. This necessitates the definition of a local coordinate system using CORD1R or CORD2R at the grids
(and defined on Field 7 of the two GRID entries) where the scalar viscous damping is required. As with any scalar
element, the CDAMP element MUST BE DEFINED as a ZERO LENGTH element (as a scalar element should
not have a dimension anyway), and not one with a finite length in order to avoid internal constraints. To this end,
the CDAMP element has been somewhat superceded by the CBUSH or CBUSH1D element.
$ BULK DATA
Grid Grid
CDAMP1 EID PID DOF C1 DOF C2
ID G1 ID G2
PDAMP PID1 C1 PID2 C2 PID3 C3 PID4 C4
$ BULK DATA
Grid Grid
CDAMP2 EID C DOF C1 DOF C2
ID G1 ID G2
The CVISC element is used to define a viscous damping between two grid points in the direction defined by the
vector joining the grids and has an associated PVISC card to define the translational CE and rotational CR viscous
damping properties. The grid ids G1 and G2 must be distinct. The CVISC element has been somewhat
superceded by the CBUSH or CBUSH1D element.
$ BULK DATA
Grid ID Grid ID
CVISC EID PID
G1 G2
PVISC PID1 CE1 CR1 PID2 CE2 CR2
6.6.2 Structural Damping Elements
Elemental structural damping is defined as follows. If the model consists of a single material, such as a casting,
then only one damping value is needed in which case the PARAM, G can be used
$ BULK DATA
PARAM, G, < Damping constant >
The other way of specifying structural damping is to use GE in the MAT1 card enabling different values to be used
for the various components of the model. Structural damping can also be specified using CELAS or CBUSH.
1028
Second Edition
6.7 General Nonlinear Excitation Frequency Dependent Spring And Linear Excitation Frequency
Dependent Damper CBUSH (PBUSH and PBUSHT) Element
Note that the CELASi and CDAMPi elements are non-metric elements. This means that grid point geometry is not
used when assembling them into the system stiffness matrix. They will always produce a 2 by 2 matrix, regardless
of offsets, coordinate systems, or other modelling details. This can result in internal constraints in the element,
which in turn leads to constraint forces to ground that do not appear in the SPC forces. An internal constraint means
that the element is not in equilibrium. The effect of internal constraints can be investigated by checking the applied
load resultant (OLOAD RESULTANT) and the reaction resultant (SPCFORCE RESULTANT), a discrepancy
indicating the existence of internal constraints. The CBUSH element can be thought of as the modern replacement
for the CELASi and CDAMPi scalar elements. It is a metric element, and will properly account for offsets,
coordinate systems, and any other modelling data. It is always in equilibrium. It is recommended that all scalar
elements in models be replaced with CBUSH elements, especially if the input file is passed onto a different
modeller. If the new modeller modifies the grid point geometry the CBUSH element will still be in equilibrium.
This may not be true for scalar elements. Must NOT use local coordinate systems on GRIDs with CBUSH. The
CBUSH element requires the definition of a local coordinate system in itself. The element force is given by
f e = k (f , u )u + c(f )u&+ iG E (f ) ku
where f is the excitation frequency. Frequency dependent stiffness and damper properties are applicable only to
forced frequency response analyses SOL 108, SOL 111 and SOL 200. Nonlinear spring properties are only
applicable to SOL 106 and SOL 129. Note however that the CBUSH element is not geometrically nonlinear.
CBUSH is the recommended element enabling up to 6 uncoupled stiffness and damping values to be inputted.
PBUSH provides nominal values and a PBUSHT (with the same ID as a PBUSH card) provides the frequency
dependency and nonlinear characteristics.
The third node G0, the orientation vector X1, X2 and X3 or the user defined coordinate system CID defines the
element coordinate system. Note that the stiffness and damping values are defined at the elastomer center of
elasticity, from which the properties are transferred to the grid nodes using rigid element equations. The output
from the ELFORCE (PRINT) request (in the element coordinate system) is as follows.
1029
Second Edition
6.8 One Dimensional Nonlinear Spring And Nonlinear Damper CBUSH1D (PBUSH1D) Element
The CBUSH1D element is a 1D version of CBUSH but with added features. It is materially and geometrically
nonlinear (for stiffness and damping) for SOL 106 and SOL 129. The element force is given by
f e = c(u )sign (u&)u&EXPV + k ( u )u + c(u&)u&
1030
Second Edition
6.9 Material Cards
6.9.1 Linear, Elastic, Isotropic Material Card for 1-D, 2-D and 3-D Elements MAT1
The user needs to specify in the MAT1 card 2 of the 3 elastic constants: elastic modulus E, shear modulus G and
Poisson’ s ratio NU. The value of the third constant is calculated by NASTRAN using G = E/[2(1+ν)]. Note that
specifying all 3 constants can give incorrect results.
$ BULK DATA
MAT1 MID E G NU RHO A TREF GE
ST SC SS MCSID
RHO density
A thermal expansion coefficient
TREF reference temperature for the calculation of thermal loads
GE structural damping coefficient
ST, SC, SS stress limits for tension, compression and shear used only to compute margins of safety in
certain elements
MCSID material coordinate system id
Element E NU G
Torsion and transverse
CROD, CBAR, CBEAM Extension and bending N/A
shear
CQUAD4, CQUAD8,
Membrane and bending Transverse shear
CTRIA3, CTRIA6
CSHEAR N/A Shear
CHEXA, CPENTA,
All terms N/A
CTETRA
Thermal Modelling of concrete as a linear elastic material

E ρ assumes that the concrete does not crack. The
ν Expansion
(N/m2) (kg/m3) cracking of concrete leads to a redistribution of load.
(Strain/°C)
Since the cracking occurs at very low strains,
Steel 2.05E11 7850 0.3 1.2E-5 concrete is a highly nonlinear material. In linear
Concrete analyses, usually a short-term high stiffness concrete
2.8E10 2400 0.2 1.0E-5
Short Term and long-term low stiffness concrete stiffness is
Concrete assumed in separate analyses to bound the results.
1.4E10 2400 0.2 1.0E-5
Long Term
Aluminium 7.0E10 2710 0.34 2.3E-5
6.9.2 Linear, Elastic, Anisotropic Elastic Material for Shell MAT2 and Solid Elements MAT9
Anisotropic refers to properties that differ in two or more directions.
6.9.3 Linear, Elastic, Orthotropic Elastic Material for Shell Elements MAT8 and Solid Elements MAT9
Orthotropic refers to a specific type of anisotropy in which planes of extreme values are orthogonal.
1031
Second Edition
6.10 Rigid Element Cards
Rigid elements are equations of motion connecting DOFs. They therefore do not have physical properties such as
cross-section, stiffness or mass.
RROD A pin-ended rod which is rigid in extension, i.e. 1 constraint equation

RBAR A rigid bar with six DOFs at each end, i.e. 6 constraint equations
RTRPLT A rigid triangular plate with six DOFs at each vertex, i.e. 12 constraint equations
RBE1 A rigid element connected to an arbitrary number of grid points. The independent and dependent
DOFs can be arbitrarily selected by the user.
RBE2 A rigid element connected to an arbitrary number of grid points. The independent DOFs are the six
components of motion at a single grid point. The dependent DOFs at the other grid points all have
the same component numbers.
$ BULK DATA
RBE2 EID GN CM GM1 GM2 GM3 GM4 GM5
GM6 GM7 GM8 …etc…
RBAR EID GNA GMB CNA CNB CMA CMB
GN-independent grid; GM-dependent grids; CN-independent grid components; CM-dependent grid components;
Note that a dependent DOF in one element cannot also be a dependent DOF in another rigid element since this will
produce conflicting equations of motion. The dependent DOF should also have no SPC specified to it. Note
however that an independent DOF can be a dependent DOF in another rigid element.
Rigid elements are used to

I. model connections such as spot welds,
II. define hinges or sliding joints,
III. distribute loads,
IV. connect dissimilar elements such as solids to shells
V. model stiffeners on plates; the stiffener can be a CBAR element offset by rigid elements from a
shell structure to a distance equal to half the thickness of the stiffener
VI. replace very stiff elements, which will produce numerical ill conditioning.
Rigid elements, however, should be used with great care. Rigid elements can transfer large loads, but since they are
not real elements they do not provide load or stress output.
1032
Second Edition
Rigid element and MPC grid point forces are requested with MPCFORCES (PRINT, PLOT). Note that akin to
GPFORCE, MPCFORCES output the force acting on the grid point, NOT ON THE ELEMENT. In fact,
MPCFORCES is the resultant force on the grid point from all adjoining rigid or MPC elements. This is clearly not
very useful unless there is only one MPC on the grid, so that the MPCFORCES will be the forces acting on the grid
due to ONLY that particular MPC. In that case, we can establish the force within the MPC by switching the
directions of the forces as illustrated below.
MPCFORCES MPC in Tension MPCFORCES
This is very much akin to GPFORCES (in the sense that it is the force on the grid not on the element(s)), hence the
reason for omitting forces from rigid or MPC elements from GPFORCE output. In the situation where there are
many MPC elements connecting into a grid, the use of a stiff CELAS or CBUSH is necessary to find out the force
going through an MPC element. The output from MPCFORCEs is the summation of all MPC-related forces at each
GRID point. If only R-elements and MPCs are used to connect a point to the model, NASTRAN will provide 0.0 as
the MPCFORCE at that GRID. This may be misleading, as the output does not provide forces for each MPC and R-
element separately, rather it provides only the summation of all MPC and R-element forces at the GRID point. For
example, if the following model of a beam with a 100.0 unit axial force is used,
100 x------x------x------x RBAR x RBAR x------x------x 100.0

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
the MPCFORCE at GRID 5 will show as 0.0, even although each of the connected RBAR elements has an axial
force of 100.0 units. If you replace one of the RBARs by a CBUSH element, the MPC-forces will now show the
components from the remaining RBAR (100.0 units), which are equal and opposite to the forces in the BUSH
element (which will not show up as MPCFORCE output but ELFORCE output).
Two methods for rigid elements are available, i.e. the linear method and the Lagrange method (see Section
6.3.23). The rigid elements are not real elements, they are internally represented by a set of MPC equations. By
using these MPC equations, the dependent degrees-of-freedom (the m-set) are eliminated from the solution set. The
rigid elements linear method has the following limitations; do not compute thermal load, do not have a differential
stiffness matrix; therefore, the solutions are incorrect for the buckling analysis or other solution sequences where
the differential stiffness matrix is required, use the small rotation theory in the geometrical nonlinear analysis so
that the solutions are incorrect in this type of analysis, use the elimination method for solution, resulting in very
dense stiffness matrices. These dense matrices cannot take advantages of the sparse matrix algorithm. The
Lagrange method does not have the above limitations. With the Lagrange method, the rigid elements become “real”
finite elements, similar to, for example, a QUAD4 element. Instead of using MPC equations, the element stiffness
matrix is computed for each rigid element. Two solution methods are available, namely the Augmented Lagrange
Multiplier Method (for this method, the solution is obtained with the independent degrees-of-freedom, the
dependent degrees-of-freedom, and the Lagrange multipliers degrees-of-freedom left in the solution set. Thus, the
sparse characteristic of the stiffness matrix is maintained and sparse matrix algorithms can be used) and the
Lagrange Elimination Method (for this method, additional operations of eliminating both the dependent and
Lagrange multiplier degrees-of-freedom from the solution set are performed after the global stiffness matrix is
assembled. The solution is performed on the independent set (the n-set), creating dense matrices after elimination.
Once again, these dense matrices cannot take advantage of the efficiency features of sparse methods). For most
problems, the augmented Lagrange multiplier method is preferred. The tangent stiffness matrix using this method,
however, is not positive definite, and can potentially pose numerical difficulties. The Lagrange elimination method
is introduced as a backup for eigenvalue problems. The Lagrange elements are only available for linear static
analysis (SOL 101), normal modes analysis (SOL 103), buckling analysis (SOL 105) and general nonlinear
analysis (SOL 400) but not in SOL 106 and SOL 129. Note that the application of proper nonlinear rigid elements
is one of the major benefits of SOL 400 to SOL 106 and SOL 129. The Lagrange elimination method is only
recommended for eigenvalue analysis, it is not recommended in nonlinear static analysis (but Augmented
Multiplier Method is fine for general nonlinear scheme SOL 400) for the following reasons. For nonlinear analysis,
1033
Second Edition
the tangent stiffness matrix must be updated at each nonlinear iteration for the Lagrange elimination method. This
implies that only the full Newton-Raphson method can be used, which conflicts with the general iteration solution
scheme employed in MSC.Nastran. The Control Case command RIGID selects the type of rigid element. It has the
following format:
LINEAR will select the linear rigid elements, LAGR will select the Lagrange rigid element with the Lagrange
multiplier method, and LGELIM will select the Lagrange element with the Lagrange elimination method. If RIGID
command does not exist in the user Case Control file, the linear rigid element will be used for all solution
sequences except SOL 400. For SOL 400, the default rigid element type is the Lagrange rigid element with the
Lagrange multiplier method. The parameter LANGLE selects the method to represent the lager rotations, having
the following values:
LANGLE,1 -- use the Gimbal angle method.
LANGLE,2 -- use the left rotation method.
LANGLE,3 -- use the right rotation method.
LANGLE=1 or 2 is the existing method. LANGLE=3 is the new method implemented for the Lagrange rigid
elements and is the only method available for the Lagrange rigid elements. Therefore, if Lagrange rigid elements
are present in a structural model, MSC.Nastran will automatically use LANGLE=3, and ignore user input on the
LANGLE parameter. The parameters LMFACT and PENFN are the scale factor k and penalty function p for the
Lagrange rigid element with the Lagrange multiplier method. The purpose of LMFACT and PENFN is to make the
values of the stiffness matrix for the Lagrange rigid elements approximately equal in relative magnitude to those of
the other elements in a structural model. Too small a value produces inaccurate results and too large a value poses
numerical difficulties. Usually, the same value is assigned to both LMFACT and PENFN. Under special
requirements, the user may assign different values to LMFACT and PENFN. For example, if and PENFN = 0.0,
then the solution method becomes the pure Lagrange multiplier method instead of the augmented Lagrange
multiplier method. However, the user must exercise caution when assigning different values to LMFACT and
PENFN. The default value is 1.0e+5. for all solution sequences except SOL 400. For the nonlinear solution
sequence SOL 400, MSC.Nastran will compute the appropriate default value in nonlinear iterations.
1034
Second Edition
6.11 Boundary Conditions
6.11.1 Single Point Constraints (SPCs)
It is important to ensure that the SPCs restrain the rigid body motion of the model in all 6 degrees-of-freedom
(translations in x,y,z directions, rotations about x,y,z axes). Failure to do so would cause singularity in the stiffness
matrix in linear static analyses. Note that this applies even if the user is applying a balanced set of loads on the
model (e.g. applying internal pressure in a closed pipe). In this case restraints in 6 degrees-of-freedom must be
specified, although they would carry negligible loads.
A special case of rigid body motion occurs when at least a part of the structure is weakly coupled to the structure,
in which case a mechanism occurs causing the matrix to again be singular.
Another application of SPCs is for applying symmetric or anti-symmetric boundary conditions by restraining the
appropriate degrees-of-freedom on the plane of symmetry. However in dynamic analysis, a symmetric boundary
will not incorporate all the modes. For instance, for a beam, symmetric boundary conditions will capture odd
bending modes, whilst antisymmetric boundary conditions are required for the even modes.
The SPC card can be used to specify constraints and enforced displacement on individual grids, whilst SPC1 cards
are used to specify a similar constraint on many grids simultaneously.
$ CASE CONTROL
SPC = < SPC SID in Bulk Data Section >
$ BULK DATA
SPC SID G1 C1 D1 G2 C2 D2
$ CASE CONTROL
SPC = < SPC SID in Bulk Data Section >
$ BULK DATA
SPC1 SID C G1 G2 G3 G4 G5 G6
G7 G8 THRU G47 G78 …etc…
Gi – grid ids
Ci – component numbers
Di – enforced displacement
1035
Second Edition
6.12 Linear Optimization SOL 200
SOL 200 is applicable to SOL 101, SOL 103, SOL 105, SOL 108, SOL 111, SOL 112 and static aeroelastic. The
analysis command in the Case Control Section specifies the type of analysis to be undertaken.
SOL 200
SUBCASE 1
ANALYSIS = STATIC
SUBCASE 2
ANALYSIS = MODES
6.12.1 Objective Function and Constraints
Response quantities that can be optimized for include weight, volume, natural frequencies, buckling load factors,
displacements, velocities, accelerations, stresses, strains, forces, frequency or transient response displacements,
velocity, acceleration, force and stress, trim, stability derivatives in a static Aeroelastic analysis, damping levels in
flutter and whatever user-defined analytical equation supplied. The case control commands are as follows.

DESOBJ(MAX or MIN) = < ID of DRESP1 or DRESP2 >
DESGLB = < ID of global constraints defined by DCONSTR >
SUBCASE 1
DESSUB = < ID of subcase dependent constraints defined by DCONSTR >
SUBCASE 2
DESSUB = < ID of subcase dependent constraints defined by DCONSTR >
The bulk data entries are described as follows.
DRESP1 defines responses computed directly by the analysis

DRESP2 defines synthesized responses for design problems
DCONSTR defines the response constraints
DCONADD defines constraint set combinations
DEQATN defines the user-defined equations
DTABLE defines a table of real constants that are used in equations in DEQATN
Do not use 0.0 for lower or upper bounds on DCONSTR.
6.12.2 Design Variables and Constraints
DVPREL1 and DVPREL2 defines the field of the property entries (model parameters) that needs to be optimized
referring to DESVAR entries to define how the values are to be altered in order to be optimized. DVPREL1 defines
linear relations the model parameters and the design variables whilst DVPREL2 defines nonlinear relations.
DVPREL1 thus defines the basic relationship between the model parameters Pi and the various design variables as
Pi = C0 + ∑ COEFFi x DVIDi
i
DESVAR defines the design variables

DLINK defines the dependent design variables
1036
Second Edition
Shape optimization is performed using the DVGRID bulk data entry (instead of DVPREL1 or DVPREL2) which
references the design variables DESVAR. It defines the direction and magnitude of a grid variation for a given
change in a design variable.
6.12.3 Optimization Control Parameters
DSCREEN specifies measures of constraint screening

DOPTPRM defines the optimization process control
6.13 Computational Memory and Processing Power Demand
If the stiffness matrix is stored and processed as if it were a full matrix, the storage and processing time resources
rapidly becomes prohibitive as the number of DOFs N increases. With regards to memory needs, a full square
matrix stored without taking advantage of symmetry, requires storage for N2 entries. If each entry is an 8-byte (32-
bit) double precision floating-point number (note that single-precision floating-point numbers require 4-bytes or
16-bits), the required storage is 8N2 bytes. Thus, a matrix of order N = 104 would require 8×108 bytes or 800
MegaBytes (MB) for storage. For large N the linear static solution is dominated by the factorization of K. This
operation requires approximately N3/6 floating point operation units. Fortunately a very high percentage of the
entries of the master stiffness matrix K are zero. Such matrices are called sparse. There are clever programming
techniques that take advantage of sparsity that fit certain patterns. These sparse matrix algorithms do not ignore
non-zero terms that are far away from the diagonal. A common sparse matrix algorithm is the skyline storage
method, which requires 8N3/2 bytes storage for two-dimensional problems. The factorization of a skymatrix requires
approximately 0.5N2 floating-point operation units for two-dimensional problems.
1037
Second Edition
7 LS-DYNA Cards
The input keyword file (.key) is order independent, case insensitive and multiple blocks of the same keyword can
be defined if desired. A keyword deck is started with an asterisk (‘*’) in column one. A dollar sign (‘$’) in column
one precedes a comment and causes the input line to be ignored. Each card is 80 character strings long; hence a 10-
field card will have 8-character string fields whilst an 8-field card will have 10-character string fields.
7.1 Keyword Format of Input Deck
To flag input as a keyword file

*KEYWORD
To denote end of input file

*END
To specify title of analysis

*TITLE
To control CPU time for the termination of the analysis

*CONTROL_CPU
CPUTIME
7.2 Output Cards
7.2.1 ASCII Output Files
Default ASCII files are

log file gives dynamic relaxation convergence factor information; added mass in mass scaling
otf file gives smallest time steps and corresponding governing element modes; mass of model
message file gives total CPU time of analysis after completion
The most useful ASCII file is the glstat (cheap in storage), which gives the global data of the analysis. It includes
the time step, the kinetic energy, the internal energy, the stonewall energy, the spring and damper energy, hourglass
energy, system damping energy, sliding interface energy, external work and total energy. ASCII files such as
BNDOUT and NCFORC are in general very, very, very expensive in storage.
*DATABASE_GLSTAT
DT = 0.01
DT = time interval between outputs
The energy output control card is often required

*CONTROL_ENERGY
Hourglass Stonewall Interface Rayleigh Damping
Energy Energy Energy Energy
Note that KE + IE + Sliding Interface Energy + Hourglass Energy + Stonewall Energy + Damping Energy = Initial
KE + External Work; If LHS > RHS, energy introduced artificially for example from numerical instability or
sudden detection of artificial penetration through a contact surface. If RHS > LHS, energy absorbed artificially.
To plot material energies

*DATABASE_MATSUM
1038
Second Edition
7.2.2 BINARY Output Files
Dynamic relaxation complete state low frequency graphical processing files (.rlf) (Cheap in storage)
*DATABASE_BINARY_D3DRLF
CYCL = 1
CYCL = output at every nth convergence check
Transient complete state low frequency graphical processing files (.ptf) (Expensive in storage)
*DATABASE_BINARY_D3PLOT
DT = 0.1 LCDT BEAM NPLTC
Time interval DT = Total Analysis Time / Number of States Desired
Contact force low frequency graphical processing files (.ctf) (Expensive in storage)
*DATABASE_BINARY_INTFOR
DT = 0.1 LCDT
Time interval = Total Analysis Time / Number of States Required
Time history high frequency signal processing files (.thf) for nodes, beams, shells & solids (Very cheap in storage)
*DATABASE_BINARY_D3THDT
DT = 0.01 LCDT
*DATABASE_HISTORY_<NODE,BEAM,SHELL,TSHELL,SOLID> (HM: outputblock)
Extra time history high frequency signal processing files (.xtf) (Very cheap in storage)
*DATABASE_BINARY_XTFILE
*DATABASE_EXTENT_BINARY
Independent restart dump files (.dpf) written separately every specified number of cycles (V. expensive in storage)
*DATABASE_BINARY_D3DUMP
CYCL = 99999
Auxiliary dump files (.adf) written over every specified number of cycles
*DATABASE_BINARY_RUNRSF
CYCL = 99999
This is good to keep just in case we may need to increase the analysis time
1039
Second Edition
7.3 Node Cards
*NODE (HM: nodes)

NID X Y Z TC RC
A node without any element will be attached a small mass and inertia. Generally, these mass-less nodes do not
cause any stability problems except when they interact with the structure.
7.4 Stiffness Element Cards
*SET_NODE
(HM: entity sets)
*SET_ELEMENT *NODE
(HM: entity sets) *ELEMENT (HM: nodes)
*PART (HM: comp collector)
*SECTION *MAT *EOS *HOURGLASS

(HM: prop collector) (HM: mat collector) (HM: prop collector) (HM: prop collector)
Basic LS-DYNA element and property card structure
Beam, shell and solid elements in LS-DYNA that use uniformly reduced numerical integration can develop zero
energy deformation modes called hourglass modes, having a typically zig-zag appearance to a mesh. These modes
are controlled numerically by either an artificial stiffness or viscosity, which resists the formation of these
undesirable modes. A brick solid element requires 3 DOFs x 8 Nodes = 24 independent deformation modes.
However, with a single integration point, the element provides 3 direct stresses + 3 shear stresses + 6 rigid body
modes = 12 independent deformation modes. Hence, 12 deformation modes are not stiff and have to be suppressed.
As the mesh gets distorted, the element accuracy is reduced and the timestep required for stability becomes smaller.
The analysis may crash. To check the prominence of hourglassing, compute the hourglass energy and ensure that it
is less than 10% of the total energy. Usually, it is the solid elements that produce the greatest hourglassing.
To avoid hourglassing:-
(i) avoid subjecting single solid elements to bending exciting hourglass modes
(ii) try to use solid elements with good aspect ratios
(iii) avoid point loads, use pressure loads instead
(iv) avoid single node or line contact
(v) use the viscous or stiffness method to suppress hourglassing; use *CONTROL_HOURGLASS to
define the global method of hourglass suppression and/or *HOURGLASS to defined hourglass
suppression cards referred to by parts *PART
1040
Second Edition
*CONTROL_HOURGLASS
Hourglass
IHQ
Coefficient
*HOURGLASS
HGID IHQ QM IBQ Q2 Q1 QB QW
IHQ=1 Standard LS-DYNA viscous hourglass suppression

IHQ=3 Exact volume solid integration viscous suppression for high velocity models such as seismic analyses
IHQ=5 Exact volume solid integration stiffness suppression for low velocity and small displacement models
(vi) employ fully integrated elements (which are stiff in all the modes of deformation associated with
its DOFs) especially where distortions are large, but this very significantly increases computational
demand
Single Integration Point Elements Fully Integration Elements

Constant stress through element Stress varies across element
Less accurate More accurate
Cheap, as a single 8 integration points element is
more expensive than 8 single integration point More expensive
elements
Susceptible to hourglassing as the element is not
stiff in all deformation modes, hence not suitable Not susceptible to hourglassing
for large distortions
1041
Second Edition
7.4.1 Spring Element Cards
Discrete spring elements have 1 DOF at each of their 2 nodes. To define a spring element
*ELEMENT_DISCRETE (HM: springs)
EID PID N1 N2 VID Scale Factor PF Offset Prestress
VID = 0 (local axes) spring acts along axis from N1 to N2
VID ≠ 0 (defined axes) and define an orientation vector *DEFINE_SD_ORIENTATION (HM: vectors) either fixed
in space or based on the motion of two nodes
*PART
PID SECID MID EOSID HGID GRAV ADPOPT TMID
*SECTION_DISCRETE
SECID DRO KD V0 CL FD CDL TDL
DRO = 0 translational spring in which case material cards define force-displacement curve
DRO = 1 torsional spring in which case material cards define moment rotation curve
To define elastic linear spring material

*MAT_SPRING_ELASTIC
Elastic
MID
Stiffness
To define elastoplastic spring material with isotropic hardening

*MAT_SPRING_ELASTOPLASTIC
Elastic Tangent
MID Yield
Stiffness Stiffness
To define elastic nonlinear spring material with an arbitrary load curve with strain effects if necessary
*MAT_SPRING_NONLINEAR_ELASTIC
MID LCID LCR
To define a inelastic nonlinear spring material

*MAT_SPRING_INELASTIC
Unloading
MID LCID CTF
Stiffness
To define nonlinear inelastic spring material with arbitrary load curves for loading and unloading with strain
softening, kinematic hardening or isotropic hardening
*MAT_SPRING_GENERAL_NONLINEAR
Initial
LCID LCID Initial Yield in
MID BETA Yield in
Loading Unloading Compression
Tension
1042
Second Edition
7.4.2 Beam Element Cards
Beam elements have 6 DOFs at each of its 2 nodes. The Hughes-Liu formulation has a single integration point
along the length, hence models constant bending. The Belytschko-Schwer formulation on the other hand models
linear variations in bending moment exactly. The latter beam hence models nodal forces and moments without any
internal beam forces or moments exactly. Hence, to model a beam with a point load in the middle exactly,
subdivide the beam into two finite beam elements with the common node at the position of the point load. A
constant magnitude distributed load on a beam would have a parabolic variation of bending moment. This cannot
be modeled exactly, but can be modeled approximately by a number of linear bending moment Belytschko-Schwer
beam finite elements. The number of section integration points depends on the quadrature rule QR specified. To
model pins at the ends of the beam, we could enable the pin flags within ELEMENT_BEAM.
*ELEMENT_BEAM (HM: bar2)

EID PID N1 N2 N3 RT1 RR1 RT2 RR2 LOCAL
A plane through N1, N2 and N3 defines the principal plane r-s of the beam, RT1, RT2, RR1 and RR2 define end
release conditions and LOCAL defines whether the coordinate system is global or local.
*PART
PID SECID MID EOSID HGID GRAV ADPOPT TMID
*SECTION_BEAM
Shear
SECID ELFORM QR/IRID Cross Section SCOOR
Factor
Area Major Iss Minor Itt Polar Irr Shear Area
ELFORM =1 Hughes-Liu (Single integration point along length, i.e. constant bending moment)
=2 Belytschko-Schwer resultant beam (Linear bending moment distribution)
=3 Truss
=4 Belytschko-Schwer full cross section integration
=6 Discrete beam/cable
QR/IRID = 1.0 One integration point across section
= 2.0 2 x 2 Gauss quadrature rule across section
= 4.0 3 x 3 Lobatto quadrature rule across section
= IRID User defined integration rule quadrature rule as specified in *INTEGRATION_BEAM
To set miscellaneous output parameters

*CONTROL_OUTPUT
Update Beam
Reference Node
Materials to model beams without yield

*MAT_ELASTIC
*MAT_LINEAR_DISCRETE_BEAM
Materials to model beams with lumped plasticity at the ends

*MAT_SEISMIC_BEAM
*MAT_NONLINEAR_DISCRETE_BEAM
*MAT_FORCE_LIMITED
1043
Second Edition
The beam is elastic until the bending moment at the ends reaches the plastic capacity MP when plastic hinges form.
The post-full yield behavior is governed by the moment-rotation curves and axial load-strain curves. Since, the
axial collapse load is usually affected by the bending moment in the beam, a different axial collapse load curve
needs to be specified for different values of end moments.
Material to model concrete beam yielding

*MAT_CONCRETE_BEAM
Material to model tall shear walls such as chimneys

*MAT_SEISMIC_BEAM
*MAT_CONCRETE_BEAM
To define user-defined integration rules QR/IRID

*INTEGRATION_BEAM
7.4.3 Shell (QUAD4, QUAD8, TRIA3, TRIA6) Element Cards
Shell elements have 5 DOFs at each node (no in-plane rotational DOF). By default it has a single integration point
in plane and 2 integration points through the thickness. A fully integrated shell element will have 4 in plane
integration points. Shells can be used either as shells (with bending and in-plane stiffness) or just as membranes
(only in-plane stiffness). Thick shell elements have 8 or 6 nodes with nodes on top and bottom of the surface like a
brick element. They have 3 translational DOFs at each node (no rotational DOFs) again like a brick element. By
default it has a single integration point in plane and 3 integration points through the thickness.
To provide controls for computing shell response

*CONTROL_SHELL
Shell Default
Warpage Sorting of Shell Warping Plane Projection
Thickness Shell
Angle Degenerate Normal Stiffness Stress Method For
Change Formulation
Limit Quads Update Enabling Plasticity Warping
Enabling Theory
To define QUAD4s or TRIA3s,
*ELEMENT_SHELL_<BLANK, THICKNESS, BETA> (HM: tria3, quad4)

EID PID N1 N2 N3 N4
The THICKNESS option overwrites that specified in *SECTION_SHELL.
*PART
PID SECID MID EOSID HGID GRAV ADAPTIVE TMID
*SECTION_SHELL_<BLANK, ALE> (HM: prop collector)

Number of
Through Integration
Shear Printout
SECID ELFORM Thickness Rule ID ICOMP SETYP
Factor Option
Integration QR/IRID
Points
T1 T2 T3 T4 NLOC
Shell elements in ascending form of accuracy and cost
1044
Second Edition
Shell Element Formulation ELFORM Accuracy Cost

Flat geometry hence no warpage
Belytschko-Tsay (BT) 2 1
One Point Quadrature
stiffness
Belytschko-Tsay with warping stiffness
1.07
(BTW)
Belytschko-Leviathan (BL) 1.25
Belytschko, Wong, Chiang (BWC) 10 1.28
Co-rotational Hughes-Liu (CHL) 1.49
Hughes-Liu (HL) 2.45
Fully Integrated Belytschko-Tsay (FBT) 2.80
Integrated
Elements
Fully
Co-rotational Fully Integrated Hughes-

8.84
Liu (CFHL)
Fully Integrated Hughes-Liu (FHL) 20.01
ELFORM element formulation theory

1: Hughes-Liu (Accurate, expensive, non-planar geometry thus warpage modeled)
2: Belytschko-Tsay (Default, less accurate, cheap)
4: C0 triangular shell
5: Belytschko-Tsay membrane
9: Fully integrated Belytschko-Tsay membrane
10: Belytschko, Wong, Chiang (Inexpensive warping stiffness for Belytschko-Tsay)
12: Plane stress
13: Plane strain
16: Fully integrated version of Belytschko, Wong, Chiang
To define user-defined integration rules QR/IRID, use *INTEGRATION_SHELL and to define viscous or stiffness
hourglass control for under-integrated elements, use *HOURGLASS.
To model non-yielding elastic, linear, isotropic materials

*MAT_ELASTIC
The inelastic, nonlinear, isotropic material model capable of defining either isotropic or kinematic hardening with
strain-rate effects (for impulsive blast or projectile crash analysis) with the Cowper-Symonds rules
*MAT_PLASTIC_KINEMATIC
*MAT_PIECEWISE_LINEAR_PLASTICITY
*MAT_PLASTICITY_WITH_DAMAGE
*MAT_STRAIN_RATE_DEPENDENT_PLASTICITY
To model reinforced concrete slabs yielding

*MAT_RC_SHEARWALL
To model reinforced concrete squat shear walls

*MAT_RC_SHEARWALL
*MAT_SPRING_SQUAT_SHEARWALL
To define an eight node thick shell element

*ELEMENT_TSHELL
*SECTION_TSHELL
*INTEGRATION_SHELL
*HOURGLASS
1045
Second Edition
7.4.4 Solid (Brick, Wedge, Tetrahedral) Element Cards
Solid elements have 3 translational DOFs at each node (no rotational DOFs). By default it has a single integration
point, hence no bending resistance. A fully integrated HEX8 solid will have 8 integration points. The basic solid
finite element is the brick. The wedge and tetrahedral elements are degenerate brick elements, i.e. the wedge is a
brick element with one of the faces collapsed into an edge, and the tetrahedral element is a wedge with the edge
collapsed into a point. The more degenerate an element, the less well it is likely to perform. Tetrahedral elements
should therefore always be avoided.
*ELEMENT_SOLID_<BLANK, ORTHO> (HM: tetra4, penta6, hex8)

EID PID N1 N2 N3 N4 N5 N6 N7 N8
*PART
*SECTION_SOLID_<BLANK, ALE>
SECID ELFORM AET
ELFORM element formulation theory

1: Constant stress solid element
2: Fully integrated S/R solid
To model non-yielding elastic, linear, isotropic materials

*MAT_ELASTIC
To model linear orthotropic elastic materials

*MAT_ORTHOTROPIC_ELASTIC
*MAT_ORTHOTROPIC_THERMAL
*MAT_TEMPERATURE_DEPENDENT_ORTHOTROPIC
The inelastic, nonlinear, isotropic basic bilinear elastoplastic material model with only isotropic hardening
*MAT_ISOTROPIC_ELASTIC_PLASTIC
The inelastic, nonlinear, isotropic material model capable of defining either isotropic or kinematic hardening with
strain-rate effects (for impulsive blast or projectile crash analysis) with the Cowper-Symonds rules
*MAT_PLASTIC_KINEMATIC
*MAT_PIECEWISE_LINEAR_PLASTICITY
*MAT_PLASTICITY_WITH_DAMAGE
*MAT_STRAIN_RATE_DEPENDENT_PLASTICITY
The hardening rule depends of β which the user can select as β = 0 for kinematic hardening where the diameter of
the yield surface remains unchanged but the center can move and β = 0 for isotropic hardening where the center of
the yield surface remains fixed and the diameter increases. A β value between these give a combination of the
kinematic and isotropic hardening rules. This value of β affects the yield stress when the loading is reversed, e.g.
what is the yield stress for compressive loading following yield in tension. Be sure to convert to true stress and true
strain. Beyond the Ultimate Tensile Strength, the experimental curve is hard to interpret because all the
deformation is concentrated in the neck region; it is recommended that the input curve be made flatter beyond UTS
than the experimental curve to allow for the uncertainties. The failure strain should generally be set based on a
reduction in cross-sectional area when the tensile test specimen fails. The unloading curve (hence inelastic material
model) has the same stiffness as the initial elastic stiffness.
1046
Second Edition
Variants of the bilinear theme include

*MAT_ELASTIC_PLASTIC_THERMAL
which allows properties to vary with temperature
*MAT_ORIENTED_CRACK
which includes fracture at predefined tensile stress
*MAT_POWER_LAW_PLASTICITY
where hardening parameters may exist in terms of an ‘n’ value
To model concrete with both volumetric crushing and strain softening in shear (to simulate cracking)
*MAT_SOIL_CONCRETE
To model plastics
*MAT_VISCOELASTIC
To model rubber
*MAT_MOONEY_RIVLIN_RUBBER
Mooney-Rivlin rubber constants for rubber with Shore Hardness of 60 (ihrd 60) are presented.
Material Parameter Property (mm, tonnes, N, sec) Property (m, kg, N, sec)
Density 0.9e-09 tonnes/mm³ 900 kg/m³
Poisson’s Ratio 0.49 0.49
Parameter A 0.474 N/mm² 0.474e+06 N/m²
Parameter B 0.118 N/mm² 0.118e+06 N/m²
To model fabrics
*MAT_FABRIC
To model glass
*MAT_ELASTIC_WITH_VISCOSITY
*MAT_LAMINATED_GLASS
To model isotropic, inelastic (hence exhibiting hysteretic damping) and non-linear stiffness degrading (with
strain) soil elements under cyclic loading such as during earthquakes
*MAT_HYSTERETIC_SOIL
*DEFINE_CURVE
This is simply a non-linear material models where the material stress-strain curve is dependent upon the strain. In
a linear material model, G = E/[2(1+ν)]. But in a non-linear material model, G is dependent upon the level of
strain. The material model itself is of course still isotropic, i.e. same property in all directions, but non-linear. The
non-linear soil material model simulates directly the non-linear shear stress-shear strain behaviour of soil loaded by
strong cyclic seismic shear waves to large shear strain amplitudes. The shear stress - shear strain curves defining
the soil elements’ constitutive models are derived from the G/G0 degradation curves (see Section 5.1.2.2). Let us
look at typical examples on a project. We shall investigate the Sakhalin Tank Loading Unit (TLU), an offshore
gravity base structure near Sakhalin Island, Russia weighing 82.7MN with fundamental frequency of about 1.0Hz
and associated modal mass of about 9.7MN. At the site of the TLU, the sandy soil overlying the bedrock is
approximately 2 m in depth. On the seabed surface, a leveling course (bedding layer) of gravel of 0.5 m thick is to
be placed. At 2.5 m below the top surface of the soil and further downwards, the measured shear wave velocity is
approximately 700.0 m/sec., indicating that the material below this level is sufficiently stiff to be considered as
bedrock. Values of the small strain shear modulus, G0, for the five layers of soil elements are listed and the figure
shows the normalised (to G0) shear stress - shear strain curves of the gravel bedding layer and the sand.
1047
Second Edition
G0 (MN/m2)
Soil Depth Density
Soil Type Lower Best Upper
Layer (m) (kg/m3)
Bound Estimate Bound
Gravel Bedding
1 0.5 to 0 1800 80.8 82.9 85.2
Layer
2 0 to –0.5 Sand 1800 97.0 99.0 102.0
3 -0.5 to -1.0 Sand 1800 93.1 98.2 105.3
4 -1.0 to -1.5 Sand 1800 89.2 96.0 105.4
5 -1.5 to -2.0 Sand 1800 86.0 94.0 105.5
While the horizontal response of the site soil to vertically propagating seismic waves depends on the non-linear
deviatoric (shear) behaviour of the soil, the vertical response is determined by the volumetric behaviour, quantified
by the bulk modulus of the soil material, which has to be entered into the material model. This is related to the
shear modulus by
E
G=
2(1 + ν)
Damping in the form of hysteretic damping within the model is explicitly accounted for due to the inelastic nature
of the material model.
To define viscous or stiffness hourglass control for under-integrated elements, use *HOURGLASS.
1048
Second Edition
7.5 Mass and Inertia Element Cards
Lumped mass elements have no DOF but add user specified masses to their single nodes.
*ELEMENT_MASS (HM: masses)
EID NID MASS VALUE
To define a lumped inertia element assigned to a node

*ELEMENT_INERTIA
EID NID CSID
IXX IXY IXZ IYY IYZ IZZ
CSID = 0 (global axes)
CSID = <integer> (defined axes) and declare a *DEFINE_COORDINATE_NODES (from three defined nodes),
*DEFINE_COORDINATE_SYSTEM (from three points) or *DEFINE_COORDINATE_VECTOR (from two
vectors)
1049
Second Edition
7.6 Damping Cards
To define mass weighted nodal damping that applies globally to the nodes of deformable bodies and to the mass
center of the rigid bodies
*DAMPING_GLOBAL
To define mass weighted damping by parts of deformable or rigid elements

*DAMPING_PART_MASS
Higher frequency motions are under-damped and lower frequency motions are over-damped.
To define Rayleigh stiffness damping coefficient by parts

*DAMPING_PART_STIFFNESS
Higher frequency motions are over-damped and lower frequency motions are under-damped.
Other damping cards are

*DAMPING_FREQUENCY_RANGE
*DAMPING_MODAL
*MAT_SEISMIC_ISOLATOR
To define a energy dissipating viscoelastic damper with damping proportional to the velocity
*SECTION_DISCRETE
*PART
*DEFINE_SD_ORIENTATION (HM: vectors)
*MAT_DAMPER_VISCOUS
*MAT_DAMPER_NONLINEAR_VISCOUS
To define a tuned-mass dampers

*ELEMENT_MASS
*SECTION_DISCRETE
*PART
*DEFINE_SD_ORIENTATION (HM: vectors)
*MAT_DAMPER_VISCOUS
*MAT_SPRING_ELASTIC
To model hysteretic dampers

or
*MAT_SEISMIC BEAM
To model viscoelastic bearing isolation devices

*ELEMENT_DISCRETE
*MAT_SPRING_ELASTIC
To model friction pendulum isolation devices

*ELEMENT_DISCRETE
*MAT_SPRING_ELASTIC
1050
Second Edition
7.7 Rigid Element Cards and Structural Internal Constraints
Only one amongst the cards of restraints, rigid bodies, prescribed motions, nodal constraints, stonewall, tied
interface and spotwelds should apply to any one DOF in the structure.
7.7.1 Rigid Body
7.7.1.1 Formulation of Rigid Body Joint
To switch the explicit rigid body joint treatment to an implicit formulation, which uses Lagrange multipliers to
impose prescribed kinematic boundary conditions and joint constraints
*CONTROL_RIGID
Lagrange Joint
Multiplier Stiffness
Flag Formulation
7.7.1.2 Rigid Body With Mass And Inertia Properties From A Set Of Nodes
*CONSTRAINED_NODAL_RIGID_BODY_<BLANK, INERTIA> (HM: rigids RgdBody)

NSID CID
To define a node set, use *SET_NODE. If the coordinate system ID, CSID ≠ 0, declare a
*DEFINE_COORDINATE_NODES (from three defined nodes), *DEFINE_COORDINATE_SYSTEM (from
three points) or *DEFINE_COORDINATE_VECTOR (from two vectors) to define a local coordinate system. Use
INERTIA option to in define inertia properties instead of calculating them.
7.7.1.3 Rigid Body With Mass And Inertia Properties From An Element
*ELEMENT_BEAM
*ELEMENT_SHELL_<BLANK, THICKNESS, BETA> (HM: tria3, quad4)
*ELEMENT_SOLID_<BLANK, ORTHO> (HM: tetra4, penta6, hex8)
*PART_<BLANK, INERTIA>

Use INERTIA option to in define inertia properties instead of calculating them.
*SECTION_BEAM
*SECTION_SHELL
*SECTION_SOLID
*MAT_RIGID
Young’s Poisson’s
MID Mass Density N COUPLE M ALIAS
Modulus Ratio
Constraints
Translational Rotational
Direction
Constraints Constraints
CMO
CMO = 1.0 (global coordinate system)
CMO = 0.0 (no constraints)
CMO = -1.0, and declare a *DEFINE_COORDINATE_NODES (from three defined nodes),
*DEFINE_COORDINATE_SYSTEM (from three points) or *DEFINE_COORDINATE_VECTOR (from two
vectors) to define a local coordinate system.
1051
Second Edition
The Young’s Modulus and Poisson’s Ratio is required for contact surface calculations. Note that different rigid
bodies should reference different parts, as each part will have one mass and inertia property and will act as one
rigid body even if all the elements of the part is not contiguous.
7.7.1.4 Extra Nodes on Rigid Bodies
Extra nodes are added onto a rigid body so that

(i) the response at a particular location can be recorded, or
(ii) a load can be applied at a particular location
(iii) joints can be attached at these nodes to join rigid bodies together
(iv) springs (stiffness) or lumped mass in a particular direction can be attached
The coordinates of the extra nodes are updated based on the motion of the rigid body.
*CONSTRAINED_EXTRA_NODES_<NODE, SET>
NID or
PID
NSID
PID defines the rigid body and NID or NSID defines the extra nodes to be added to the rigid body.
*SET_NODE_LIST
7.7.1.5 Merging Rigid Bodies
To merge rigid bodies

*CONSTRAINED_RIGID_BODIES
*PART for master rigid body part
*PART for slave rigid body part
To define a joint between two rigid bodies (as tied nodes cannot be used on rigid bodies),
*CONSTRAINED_JOINT_<...OPTIONS...>_<LOCAL> (HM: joints)
*CONSTRAINED_JOINT_STIFFNESS_<GENERALIZED, FLEXION-TORSION>
The spherical joint is used to model pinned connections, the revolute a hinge connection and the cylindrical a hinge
with sliding along its axis.
7.7.2 Rigidwall
To define a rigidwall
*RIGIDWALL_GEOMETRIC
*RIGIDWALL_PLANAR
This is a simplification of a contact surface which models a plane through which nodes cannot pass. This is used to
model hard targets such as rigid walls defined by a vector normal to the plane of the rigid wall pointing out of the
wall towards the model. Only nodes on the outside of the model need to be chosen as slave nodes.
1052
Second Edition
7.7.3 Constraints Between DOFs
7.7.3.1 Interpolation Constraint
The motion of a single dependent node is interpolated from the motion of a set of independent nodes. This is useful
for: -
(i) the load distribution of a translational load or moment, applied to the dependent node to the
surrounding independent nodes
(ii) the modelling of shell-brick or beam-brick interfaces
*CONSTRAINED_INTERPOLATION
Dependent Dependent
ID
NID DOF
XX YY ZZ
Independent Independent X Weight Y Weight Z Weight
Weight Weight Weight
NID DOF Factor Factor Factor
Factor Factor Factor
XX YY ZZ
Independent Independent X Weight Y Weight Z Weight
Weight Weight Weight
NID DOF Factor Factor Factor
Factor Factor Factor
… … … … … … … …
To tie a beam to a solid with no common nodes for instance, the dependent node is a beam end node with
dependent DOF 123456, and the independent nodes are a few nodes on the solid with DOF 123. If the beam node is
shared, then the dependent DOF will be 123. To distribute a load,
To define nodal constraint sets for translational motion (no rotational coupling) in global coordinates
*CONSTRAINED_NODE_SET (HM: rigids ConNode)
*SET_NODE
To define linear constraint equations between displacements / rotations in global coordinates

*CONSTRAINED_LINEAR (HM: equation)
To constrain particular DOFs in order to model pins (tied in translation), rigid planes (tied vertically) etc, we can
use tied nodes
*CONTRAINED_TIED_NODES_FAILURE
7.7.4 Global Restraints
To define a global boundary constraint plane
*CONSTRAINED_GLOBAL
Translational Rotational Direction
X Offset Y Offset Z Offset
Constraint Constraint of Normal
1053
Second Edition
7.7.5 Welds and Rivets
7.7.5.1 Generalized Spot Weld
*CONSTRAINED_GENERALIZED_WELD_<SPOT,FILLET,BUTT,CROSS_FILLET,COMBINED>
*SET_NODE
*DEFINE_COORDINATE_<NODES,SYSTEM,VECTOR> (HM: systems) if nodes coincident
The generalized spotweld option includes a ductile failure in addition to brittle failure of the simple spotweld and
allows for more than 2 nodes in the spotweld and for the nodes to be coincident.
7.7.5.2 Generalized Fillet Weld
*CONSTRAINED_GENERALIZED_WELD_FILLET
7.7.5.3 Generalized Butt Weld
*CONSTRAINED_GENERALIZED_WELD_BUTT
7.7.5.4 Generalized Cross-Fillet Weld
*CONSTRAINED_GENERALIZED_WELD_CROSS_FILLET
7.7.5.5 Generalized Combined Weld
*CONSTRAINED_GENERALIZED_WELD_COMBINED
7.7.5.6 Mass-Less Spotweld
*CONSTRAINED_SPOTWELD
The spotweld is defined by 2 non-coincident nodes and a brittle failure load.
7.7.5.7 Mass-Less Rivet
To define a mass less rivet

*CONSTRAINED_RIVET
7.7.6 Concrete Rebars
To model reinforcement bars in concrete

*CONSTRAINED_LAGRANGE_IN_SOLID
*PART or *SET_PART or *SET_SEGMENT for slave elements
*PART or *SET_PART for master solid elements
1054
Second Edition
7.8 Boundary Conditions Cards
7.8.1 Single Point Constraints SPCs
To apply essential boundary conditions, constraints of degrees of freedom can be applied on *NODE cards, but this
not recommended and is only available for backward compatibility. Instead, it is better to explicitly define single
point constraints
*BOUNDARY_SPC_<NODE, SET> (HM: constraints BoundSPC)

NID or
CID DOFX DOFY DOFZ DOFRX DOFRY DOFRZ
NSID
Rigid bodies should not be subjected to SPCs. Instead constraints on rigid bodies are applied on *MAT_RIGID.
*SET_NODE_LIST
If the coordinate system ID is not global (CID ≠ 0) then it is necessary to define a local coordinate system i.e.
declare a *DEFINE_COORDINATE_NODES (from three defined nodes), *DEFINE_COORDINATE_SYSTEM
(from three points) or *DEFINE_COORDINATE_VECTOR (from two vectors) (HM: systems).
7.8.2 Non-Reflecting Boundaries
To define a non-reflecting boundary for infinite solid element modelling such as infinite soil
* BOUNDARY_NON_REFLECTING
Dilatation Shear
Segment
Waves Waves
Set ID
Activation Activation
In seismic analyses, it is sufficient to activate the shear waves flag only. Segments are equivalent to triangular or
quadrilateral element faces on the boundary defined by listing corner nodes clockwise or anticlockwise.
*SET_SEGMENT
ID DA1 DA2 DA3 DA4
1055
Second Edition
7.8.3 Contact Cards
To control defaults for computation with contact surfaces

*CONTROL_CONTACT
The surface definition for contact is made up of segments on the shell or solid element surfaces.
7.8.3.1 Rigidwall Contact
If the node penetrates the rigidwall, the normal velocity and acceleration is set to zero.
7.8.3.2 Surface To Surface Contact
This is the most general contact definition, which includes penetration, separation and friction algorithms. It works
by the penalty force method in which the penetration of one surface to another is resisted by a force. Contact is only
between the defined slave and master surfaces. Make the smaller surface the slave and the larger surface the master.
*CONTACT_AUTOMATIC_SURFACE_TO_SURFACE_TITLE (HM: interface)
*CONTACT_CONSTRAINT_SURFACE_TO_SURFACE_TITLE
The AUTOMATIC method is a penalty method (see Section 6.3.23). The soft option flag can be set if penetration
is observed. The CONSTRAINT method is a Lagrange method and should be used if the soft option in the usual
AUTOMATIC method is still not good enough to prevent penetrations.
7.8.3.3 Single Surface Contact
This is used when a surface folds onto itself or where there is no separation into master and slave surfaces. It
provides a generalized contact capability, which does not require identification of slave and master surfaces, i.e.
any node on surface can contact any element. Hence the search logic is more complicated and more expensive than
the surface-to-surface definition.
*CONTACT_AUTOMATIC_SINGLE_SURFACE_TITLE
7.8.3.4 Nodes to Surface Contact
This is a one-way contact surface treatment, the slave side is the nodes and the master side is the surface. It is used
to model situations such as beam impacting a plate where the beam is not a ‘surface’. But the logic is similar to that
for sliding with separation.
*CONTACT_AUTOMATIC_NODES_TO_SURFACE_TITLE
*CONTACT_CONSTRAINT_NODES_TO_SURFACE_TITLE
7.8.3.5 Eroding Contacts
This is used in situations where the elements on the contact surface fail and have to be deleted, hence modifying the
contact surface.
7.8.3.6 Tied Interface
*CONTACT_TIED_SURFACE_TO_SURFACE
*CONTACT_TIED_NODES_TO_SURFACE
*CONTACT_TIED_SHELL_EDGE_TO_SURFACE
This is used to glue different meshes together, hence providing a simple efficient way of mesh refinement.
However, this can produce internal reflection of stress waves (although so can conventional mesh refinement).
1056
Second Edition
7.9 Restart Capabilities
*RESTART
To allow parts that is defined as deformable to rigid at the start on an analysis

*DEFORMABLE_TO_RIGID_<AUTOMATIC,INERTIA>
*RIGID_TO_DEFORMABLE
Computation cost can be significantly reduced by switching deformable parts that are not expected to deform to
rigid parts. The analysis can be stopped and restarted with the parts switched back to deformable just when they are
expected to deform.
*STRESS_INITIALIZATION
1057
Second Edition
8 STRUCTURAL ENGINEERING
8.1 Conceptual Structural Design
8.1.1 Spans and Span to Depth Ratios
1058
Second Edition
8.1.2 Steel Single-Storey Buildings
Lateral stability checks should be made in accordance to Section 3.1.6.7 to account for possible P-∆ effects.
8.1.2.1 Universal Beam – Universal Column (No Pinned or Two-Pinned) Portal Frame
The types of universal beam – universal column portal frame are: -

I. No Pinned (Rigid Bases), Rigid Eaves, Rigid Apex (Statical Indeterminacy, αs = 3)
II. Two Pinned (Pinned Bases), Rigid Eaves, Rigid Apex (Statical Indeterminacy, αs = 1)
The basic beam − column portal frame can span up to 60m. The portal frames spacing are usually 5-8m with
6m and 7.5m the most common. The eaves height is 6-15m. The purlin spacing is usually 1.5-2m for cladding
performance (can support local loads and drainage requirements), erectability and economically designed restraint
requirements.
There is a need for an inclination (usually about 6°) in the roof for drainage, but for small spans (10m) the beam
can be horizontal with the inclination being created by precambering or in the cladding finishes. Flat roofs are
notoriously difficult to weather proof since deflections of the cross beam induce ponding of rainwater on the roof.
Portal frames of low inclination also create substantial horizontal thrusts at the base. Alternatively, the portal frame
cross beam can be inclined.
The portal frame can be haunched at the eaves and/or apex where the bending moments are greatest.
Lateral stability system is an important consideration. There are two directions to consider, in the vertical plane of
the portal frame and the vertical plane orthogonal to it.
In the vertical plane of the portal frame, lateral stability can be provided by rigid bases (i.e. cantilever columns)
and/or by moment resistance at the eaves and apex, the latter of which is usual. The pinned base is more common
to the fixed base portal frame, although the former results in a slightly heavier frame although the increase in frame
cost is offset by the reduced foundation size. The portal frame must provide moment resistance at the eaves for the
pinned base case, since it becomes a mechanism to lateral loads in the plane of the portal frame otherwise. With
rigid bases and moment resistance at the eaves and apex, the frame is a rigid portal frame whilst with pinned
bases and moment resistance at the eaves and apex, the frame is a two-pinned portal frame.
Moment resistance at the eaves can be provided by adding a haunch member where although all connections are
pinned, the eaves connection is effectively triangulated and together acts as a moment resisting connection.
Alternatively of course, the connection can be designed as a moment resisting connection.
In the vertical plane orthogonal to that of the portal frame, lateral stability is best provided by pin-jointed wind
girder bracing elements at the gable end. The horizontal wind girder (often located within the depth of the cross
beams) has to be supplemented by a vertical wind girder in the same bay to transmit the forces into the
1059
Second Edition
foundations much like the multi-storey building in horizontal plane bracing arrangement described in Section
8.1.3.3. Of course, instead of the bracing arrangement, both the horizontal and vertical wind girder can be a
reinforced concrete slab (or wall) or a moment resisting connection.
The horizontal wind girder can be of two types. Type (a) which is a Warren bracing uses struts (often tubes)
capable of resisting tension and compression. Type (b) uses less material but more members. The diagonals are
tension only (wire ropes) and the orthogonal compression strut is of the shortest possible length. Similar
arrangements must be used for the vertical wind girder in the same bay to carry the forces to the foundations.
The two bracings systems are shown below. Note the in roof plane tie members to transfer the loads to the in roof
plane girder which in turn transfers load to the vertical stability elements. These tie members also act to restrain the
compression members from buckling.
1060
Second Edition
The portal frame can be optionally tied. The portal can also be tied at the eaves to reduce the spread and the size of
the rafter, although the headroom becomes restricted. For tied portals, it is mandatory that a second order analysis
is performed for the in-plane stability analysis, instead of a simple P-∆ analysis. This is because the high tensile
force in the ties would cause it to elongate and thus would allow the eaves to spread under gravity. This in turn
causes a downward deflection in the apex, hence reducing the lever arm between the rafter and the tie which
increases the tension in the tie and compression in the rafter.
The dominant load case governing strength of frame is usually snow load (unless eaves height is large in relation
to span), which is generally 0.6kN/m2. However, with sloping roofs of multiple spans and parapets, the action of
drifting snow need to be considered (especially on the purlins and cladding) according to BS 6399-3.
Most popular purlin sections are cold-formed computer numerically controlled (CNC) Zed, modified Zed and
Sigma.
The disadvantage of the Zed is that the principal axis is inclined to the web hence out of plane displacement occur
or out-of plane forces are generated. The modified Zed has a principal axis inclination which is much reduced
whilst the Sigma has a shear centre almost coincident with the load application line.
Portal frames analyzed using a plastic collapse analysis method (Section 3.3.6.1) as opposed to a linear elastic
analysis method tends to be more economical in weight. If plastic design is employed, then the plastic load factor
λP must be ensured to be greater than the P-∆ amplification which is a function of the elastic buckling load factor,
λE as presented in Section 3.1.6.7. Also, if plastic design is utilized, then the sections must have sufficient rotation
capacity, i.e. they must be classified as plastic, not even compact.
For the SLS, excessive lateral deflections can be reduced by increasing rafter size, fixing bases and having a
haunch as that is the location of high bending moments.
1061
Second Edition
8.1.2.2 Universal Beam – Universal Column (Three-Pinned) Portal Frame
The types of universal beam – universal column three pinned portal frame are: -
I. Rigid Bases, Pinned Eaves, Pinned Apex (Statical Indeterminacy, αs = 0)
II. Pinned Bases, Rigid Eaves, Pinned Apex (Statical Indeterminacy, αs = 0)
Alternatively of course, the connection can be designed as a moment resisting connection.
The three-pinned portal is statically determinate. Hence an elastic method of analysis is performed with a plastic
design methodology. A plastic collapse analysis cannot be performed as the onset of the first plastic hinge denotes
a plastic collapse since the degree of statical inderminacy is zero. No further redundancy is present in the system to
warrant a plastic collapse analysis.
The horizontal thrust is (ωL2/8)/H where H is the height to the apex. The moment at the eaves is H.a where a is
the height to the eaves.
1062
Second Edition
8.1.2.3 Truss – Stanchion Portal Frame
The types of truss – stanchion portal frame are: -

I. Rigid Bases, Rigid Eaves (Finite Eaves Depth) (Statical Indeterminacy, αs = 3)
II. Pinned Bases, Rigid Eaves (Finite Eaves Depth) (Statical Indeterminacy, αs = 1)
III. Rigid Bases, Pinned Eaves (No Eaves Depth) (Statical Indeterminacy, αs = 1)
IV. Pinned Bases, Pinned Eaves (No Eaves Depth), Diaphragm Roof To Braced Wall in the Plane of
the Portal Frame (Statical Indeterminacy, αs = −1 Without Diaphragm and Braced Wall)
The truss and stanchion system is essentially an extension to the beam and column system to increase spans.
In the vertical plane of the portal frame, lateral stability can be provided by rigid bases (i.e.cantilever columns)
and/or by moment resistance at the eaves for trusses with a finite depth at the eaves, the latter of which is not
usual. The portal frame can be pinned base or fixed base. The portal frame must provide moment resistance at the
eaves for the pinned base case, since it becomes a mechanism to lateral loads in the plane of the portal frame
otherwise. With rigid bases and moment resistance at the eaves, the frame is a rigid portal frame, with pinned
bases and moment resistance at the eaves, the frame is a two-pinned portal frame, and with rigid bases and no
moment resistance at the eaves, the frame is a two-pinned portal frame.
Moment resistance at the eaves is provided by the finite depth of the truss. If this is not provided or to further
enhance the capacity of connection if a finite depth is provided, a haunch member can be added.
girder bracing (say Warren bracing) elements at the gable end. The horizontal wind girder is in the plane of the
bottom booms and rafter and the vertical wind girder is located in the same bay to carry the forces into the
foundations, much like the multi-storey building in horizontal plane bracing arrangement described in Section
8.1.3.3. Of course, instead of the bracing arrangement, both the horizontal and vertical wind girder can be a
reinforced concrete slab (or wall) or a moment resisting connection.
The portal frame can be optionally tied.
Compression member buckling restraint is an important consideration for truss and stanchion systems. Under
gravity, top chord members are restraint by the purlins which support the roof cladding. In the case of load reversal.
The bottom chord must be restrained. A method would be to use ties on the bottom chord running the entire
building length. Another solution would be to use a compression strut from the chord member to the roof purlin.
1063
Second Edition
The eccentricity, e at the connection between the centerlines of the braces to the chord that may result will have an
effect on the induced bending moments at the joint and the members. This eccentricity moment (calculated simply
by the sum of the horizontal components of the bracing member forces multiplied by the nodal eccentricity, e)
should be added to the effects obtained from the computer analysis in the design of the chord, braces and also the
joint. It is customary to proportion this secondary bending moment to the connecting members in relation to their
stiffnesses. The effect of secondary moments especially in heavily loaded members can at times cause an increase
in the section size. In such cases, consideration should be given to the use of gusset plates to ensure connections are
coincident at the node points.
In some instances, omission of alternate columns may be permitted. Vertical load from intermediate truss can
then be transferred using long-span eave beams; and lateral loading from intermediate truss can be transferred by in
plan bracing to points of vertical bracing or vertical cantilevers (i.e. rigid base columns).
8.1.2.3.1 Warren Truss
Warren Truss; Warren trusses have equal length tension and compression web members. They have about half the
number of bracing members and half the number of connections to Pratt trusses. Warren trusses are also more open.
The force in the chord at midspan is (ωL2/8)/d whilst the force in the diagonal web member at the support is
(ωL/2).(S/d) where S is the length of the web member.
8.1.2.3.2 Modified Warren Truss (i.e. Warren Truss with Vertical Brace Elements)
The modified Warren truss (with vertical brace elements) is used when loading is intended within the chord
members instead of just at the joints in order to reduce bending moments in chord. It also is used to reduce effective
buckling lengths of the chords. It can span greater distances than the Warren truss but uses more material to the
Pratt truss.
1064
Second Edition
8.1.2.3.3 Pratt Truss
Under vertical load, the longer diagonals are in tension and the shorter vertical braces are in compression. The
disadvantage is that the compression chord is more heavily loaded than the tension chord at midspan. A
disadvantage of the pitched Pratt roof truss is that wind loads may cause a reversal of load thus putting the longer
web member into compression.
8.1.2.3.4 Howe Truss
The Howe truss is the converse to the Pratt roof truss. For lightly loaded roofs under wind load causing a reversal
of vertical load upwards, the Howe can be advantages. Another advantage is the fact that the tension chord is more
heavily loaded than the compression chord at midspan under normal vertical loading.
8.1.2.3.5 Fink Truss
The Fink truss offers savings in steel weight for long span high pitched roofs as the members are subdivided.
For a Fink truss of span L, height 0.2L and subject to force W at each of the 9 equally spaced nodes on the roof, the
force in the top chord at the support is tensile 1.18W, the force in the bottom chord at the support is compressive
1.09W and the inclined web member at the apex is compressive 0.47W.
8.1.2.3.6 Mansard Truss
The Mansard truss is a variation of the Fink truss which has the advantage of reducing the unusable roof space. The
main disadvantage is that the forces in the chords are increased because the depth is decreased. There could also be
more connections to fabricate.
8.1.2.3.7 Vierendeel Truss
8.1.2.3.8 Saw-tooth Truss
1065
Second Edition
1066
Second Edition
8.1.3 Steel and Reinforced Concrete Multi-Storey (Potentially Tall) Buildings

8.1.3.1 Building Geometry and Anatomy
1067
Second Edition
1068
Second Edition
Retail Office
Component
1 New Change London 1 New Change London
Flooring 75mm Screed 150mm Raised Floor
Structure 425mm Ribbed Floor 830mm Composite Beam
Integrated Within Web
Services 480mm
Openings of 475mm
Def + Tol 50mm 50mm
Ceiling 70mm 70mm
Headroom 5000 – 5500mm 2750mm
1069
Second Edition
8.1.3.2 Vertical Gravity and Lateral Stability Systems
Lateral stability elements should also be continuous from the foundations to the top of the structure it stabilizes,
otherwise a provisions must be made for the transfer of forces to other bays. Lateral stability must be provided for
both the orthogonal vertical planes. P-∆ effects should be incorporated in accordance to Section 3.1.6.7.
8.1.3.2.1 Rigid Base Frames (Buildings Up To A Few Stories)
Frames which have a rigid base with the beams pinned into the columns are not very stiff to lateral loads. Note that
when beams are pinned into the columns, at least one base has got to be rigid, otherwise the frame is a mechanism.
1070
Second Edition
8.1.3.2.2 Braced Frames (Buildings Up To 20 Stories)
Braced frames are cantilevered vertical trusses (a.k.a. shear trusses) resisting lateral loads primarily through the
axial stiffness of the frame members. Axial shortening and elongation of the column members under lateral loading
accounts for 80 – 90% of the overall system deformation. Braces are usually steel and made of double angles,
channels, T, tubes or wide-flange shapes. Braced frames are either concentric or eccentric.
Concentric brace frames have all members intersecting at a point and have high stiffness but low ductility.
Concentric brace frames can be X, diagonal or Modified Warren, Pratt or Howe, K or V, diamond or Petit. The X-
bracing exhibits high lateral stiffness to weight ratio, but however creates a short circuit in the column gravity load
transfer path as they absorb a portion of the column load in proportion to their stiffness, hence creating additional
forces in both the diagonal and horizontal members of the X-bracing system.
X-Bracing Diagonal Bracing Pratt or Howe

(Modified Warren) Bracing
K-Bracing V-Bracing Diamond Bracing
Note that these bracing arrangements can be employed for multiple storeys at a time if the effective length is not
prohibitive. This is illustrated for a two storey X-bracing and a 2 and 4 storey diagonal (modified Warren) bracing.
X-Bracing Diagonal Bracing

Diagonal Bracing
(Modified Warren)
(Modified Warren)
The X-bracing causes a short circuit in the gravity load path. Vertical loads will produce axial loads in the
bracing members and also produce a horizontal reaction at the base. This is depicted below for a pinned base
braced portal frame. The beam is also pinned so that the lateral stability system does not include a moment resisting
frame, but solely bracings. The vertical load at the ends of the beam depicts the large axial force coming down the
columns whilst the smaller vertical beam load represents the load on the individual beam. Note the axial force in
the bracing element and the thrust force at the base. The thrust is not particularly a problem as it can be resisted by
having a tie element at the base.
1071
Second Edition
K-bracing does not present a short circuit to the column gravity load, but does resist the vertical load of a particular
floor. Hence a smaller axial load in the bracing and base thrust is observed.
1072
Second Edition
V-bracing does not present a short circuit to the column gravity load, but does resist the vertical load of a particular
floor.
The Pratt and diagonal bracings do not resist the vertical columns loads nor a particular storey loads, hence no base
thrust is observed.
1073
Second Edition
Eccentric brace frames utilize axis offsets to introduce flexure and shear into the frame, which lowers the
stiffness-to-weight ratio but increases ductility, ideal for seismic regions.
Eccentric Eccentric Eccentic

Pratt Bracing K-Bracing V-Bracing
These vertical braced frames (so-called vertical cantilevered trusses) are often located in the elevator and service
core areas as they can be enclosed within permanent walls. Braced frames in orthogonal planes can be joined to
form closed section cells, which together are effective in resisting torsional forces.
The aspect ratio of the bracing system matters for the magnitude of the push pull effect. The bracing is really just a
vertical cantilever truss and the force in the chords is dependent the magnitude of the applied horizontal force and
the lever arm between the chords. Hence, the slenderness ratio of these core trusses is of importance. As the core
truss becomes more slender (i.e. a higher core truss with a smaller footprint area) the overall overturning effect
manifests itself in increased axial forces in the chord members, i.e. the columns of the core truss system. Whilst
these core truss chord members can be designed to resist tension forces, net foundation uplift is generally
undesirable. Hence a design objective would be to spread the chords are far apart as possible whilst diverting
gravity load to these chords to prevent or reduce the net tensile force.
1074
Second Edition
1075
Second Edition
8.1.3.2.3 Moment Resisting Frames (Buildings Up To 20 – 30 Stories)
Moment resisting frames consist of horizontal and vertical members rigidly connected together in a planar grid
form which resists lateral loads primarily through the flexural stiffness of the members, hence not very efficient.
Moment resisting frames have the advantage of flexibility in architectural planning. They can be placed in or
around the core, on the exterior or throughout the interior of the building.
The size of beam members in a moment resisting frame often controlled by stiffness rather than strength in order
to develop an acceptable drift. The lateral drift is a function of both the beam and column stiffness. As beam spans
are often greater than story heights, the beam second moment of area has to be greater than that of the column by
the ratio of beam span to story height for an effective moment resisting frame. Hence moment frames, effectively
sized for lateral sway control, increase in column and beam size and stiffness from top to bottom in proportion to
the lateral shear. On the other hand, for gravity loads, the column sizes increase from top to bottom but the beam
sizes remain the same. Thus, it would be efficient if gravity loads applied on the beams were diverted to the
beams of the moment resisting frames as much as possible due to their increases size (for stiffness) and hence
strength capacity.
As a first pass to the design of multi-storey buildings, a load take down must be performed. This distributes the
forces from the floors onto columns according to the tributary area, thus making the assumption that all column
supports on the floor are pinned and that they have the same vertical stiffness.
1076
Second Edition
8.1.3.2.4 Braced and Moment Resisting Frames (Buildings Up To 40 – 50 Stories)
The linear wind sway of the moment frame when combined with the cantilever parabolic sway of the truss
produces enhanced lateral stiffness. The truss is restrained by the frame at the upper part of the building whereas at
the lower part the truss restrains the frame. In general core trusses are combined with moment frames located in the
perimeter.
1077
Second Edition
8.1.3.2.5 Core and Shear Walls (Buildings Up To 35 – 40 Stories)
Central cores and shear walls have been the most common system for lateral stability. Shear wall systems used for
tall office buildings groups shear walls around service cores, elevator shafts and stairwells to form a stiff box type
structure. In contrast with office buildings, high rise residential buildings have less demand for elevators, lobbies
and services and hence do not usually have large stiff concrete shear wall boxes. A more common system will
incorporate a small box structure around a smaller number of elevators and stair wells and include discrete shear
walls between apartments. In both cases, the shear walls are designed to cantilever from the foundation level.
Multiple shear walls throughout a tall building may be coupled to provide additional frame action and hence
increase the overall building stiffness. Coupling can be realized by relatively shallow header or link beams within
the ceiling cavity at each level or by means of one or two storey high shear coupling walls. By adding a coupling
shear wall at a single level, reverse curvature is induced in the core above the coupling shear wall, significantly
reducing lateral drift by increasing the overall building stiffness. As the building mass increase is minimal, there
will be significant increase in the building natural frequency.
Shear walls with returns work better than those without.
Many tall buildings undergo torsional loading due to the nonalignment of the building shear centre (due to the
asymmetry of the location of the shear wall boxes) with the location of the horizontal load application. Boxed shear
wall systems provide an efficient means of resisting such torsion. Torsion is resisted by both warping and uniform
shear. Particular care must be taken during computer modelling of boxed shear walls to reflect penetrations for
elevator and stair doors, which affect the stiffness considerably.
Reinforced concrete walls must be at least 180mm thick.
1078
Second Edition
8.1.3.2.6 Core and Outriggers (Buildings Up To 75 Stories)
Central core boxes can be coupled via stiff beams or trusses, at discrete levels, to external shear walls or columns to
achieve a stiff building structure. These outriggers serve to reduce the overturning moment in the core that would
otherwise act as a pure cantilever, and to transfer the reduced moment to columns outside the core by way of a
tension-compression couple, which takes advantage of the increased moment arm between these columns. Hence
the uplift due to the core is reduced or eliminated along with the prohibitively high overturning forces in the
building’s foundation system. Uplift should be avoided at all costs as that would result in the requirement of
complicated rock anchor foundations. Piles are not able to resist uplift. Unlike the outrigger system, the core system
inherently simply cannot take advantage of the entire with of the building to resist the lateral forces.
Modern high-rise buildings frequently incorporate central elevator core along with generous column-free floor
space between the core and the exterior support columns. Whilst greatly efficient, it also disconnects the two major
structural elements available to resist the critical overturning forces present in the high-rise building and reduces it
to the sum of the independent resistance of the individual structural elements, i.e. the core and the perimeter
columns. But the incorporation of the outriggers will couple these two structural elements and enhances the
systems ability to resist overturning forces dramatically. The system utilizes the perimeter gravity load resisting
columns to resist the lateral loads.
The most significant drawback of the outrigger system is their potential interference with occupy able and rentable
space. This can be minimized or eliminated by locating outriggers in mechanical and interstitial levels or locating
them in the natural sloping lines of the building profile.
1079
Second Edition
8.1.3.2.7 Tubular Systems (Buildings Up To 110 Stories)
Tubular systems include framed tubes, trussed tube and the bundled tube.
The organization of the framed tube system is generally one of closely paced exterior columns and deep spandrel
beams rigidly connected together, with the entire assemblage continuous along each façade and around the building
corners. The system is a logical extension of the moment resisting frame, whereby the beam and column stiffnesses
are increased dramatically by reducing the clear span dimension and increasing the member depths, something
which is not done within the building. The exterior column spacing is usually of the order of 1.5m to 4.5m centres.
Spandrel beam depths for normal office or residential occupancy applications are typically 600m to 1200m. A
benefit of the closely spaced and deep exterior members is in the total or partial elimination of the need for
intermediate vertical mullion elements for cladding support.
The resulting closely spaced beam-column frame arrangement approximates a tube cantilevered from the ground
with openings punched through the tube walls. The framed tube system suffers from the “shear lag effect” i.e. that
the columns in the middle of a side of the building is less stressed axially that the columns at the edges.
Wind
The more the distribution of the perimeter columns is similar to that of a fully rigid box cantilevered at the base, the
more efficient the system will be. For the case of the solid walled tube, the distribution of axial force would be
expected to be uniform over the windward and leeward walls and linear over the sidewalls as shown in red above.
As the tubular walls are punched, creating beam-column frames, linear shear frame deformations are introduced
due to shear and flexure in the tubular members as well as rotations of the member joints. This reduces the effective
stiffness of the system as a cantilever. The extent to which the actual axial load distribution in the tube columns
departs from the ideal is termed the “shear lag effect”. The forces in the columns towards the middle of the flange
frames lag behind those nearer the corner and are thus less than fully utilized. Limiting the shear lag is essential for
optimal development of the tubular system. A reasonable objective is to strive toward at least 75% efficiency such
that the cantilever parabolic component in the overall system deflection under wind load dominates.
The framed tube is usually made of reinforced concrete due to its inherent monolithic nature. The framed tube in
structural steel requires welding of the beam column joint to develop rigidity and continuity. Often the formation of
fabricated tree elements, where all the welding is performed in the shop in a horizontal position, has made the steel
frame tube system more practical and efficient. The trees are then erected by bolting the spandrel beams together at
midspan near the point of inflexion. The column spacing in steel framed tubular buildings must be evaluated to
balance the needs for higher cantilever efficiency through closer spacing with increased fabrication costs. The use
of deeper built up sections versus rolled members is also a matter of cost-effectiveness.
The trussed tube system represents a classic solution for a tube uniquely suited to the qualities and character of
structural steel. The ideal tubular system is one which interconnects all exterior columns to form a rigid box, which
can resist lateral shears by axial forces in its members rather than through flexure. This is achieved by introducing a
minimum number of diagonals on each façade and making the diagonals intersect at the same point at the corner
column. The system is tubular in that the fascia diagonals intersect not only to form a truss in the plane but also
1080
Second Edition
interact with the trusses on the perpendicular faces to affect the tubular behaviour. This creates the X form between
corner columns on each façade. The diagonals can also be smaller Xs (instead of full cross façade), thus
transforming each façade into a diagonalized braced frame form. A significant advantage of the trussed tube system
is that relatively broad column spacing can be used in contrast to framed tube systems. The result is large clear
spaces for windows, a particular characteristic of steel buildings. The larger spaced perimeter columns are
especially welcome at the base of the building where architectural planning typically demands open access to the
building interior from the surrounding infrastructure with as little encumbrance as possible from the exterior
framework. Another advantage is that the façade diagonalization serves to equalize the gravity loads in the exterior
columns, and this can have a significant impact on member proportions and foundation design.
The framed and trussed tubular systems can readily be adapted to a variety of nonrectilinear, closed-plan forms,
including circular, hexagonal, triangular, and other polygonal shapes. The most efficient shape is the square,
whereas the triangular tube has the least inherent efficiency. The high torsional stiffness characteristic of the
exterior tubular system has advantages in structuring unsymmetrical shapes.
The bundled tube (or modular tube) was invented to cater for non-prismatic tubular systems. In the purest form,
tubular systems are generally applicable to prismatic vertical profiles. For varying profiles and buildings involving
significant vertical façade offsets, the discontinuity of the tubular frame to fit the shape suffers from serious
inefficiencies. The need for vertical planning modulation and the control of shear lag for very tall buildings led to
the development of the bundled, or modular tube concept. The bundled tube is more efficient because it was shown
that the higher the aspect ratio of the building (i.e. the greater the ratio of height to the tube plan size with the
perimeter column spacing and size kept constant), the greater the percentage of parabolic cantilever deflection
component in the total lateral deflection at the top of the building. That is to say, the shear lag component is less
significant. This led to the notion that if the overall tubular shape is structured into small cells in plan by the
inclusion of interior tubular lines, then the overall structure would have the cantilever efficiency associated with
that of a single cell with high aspect ratio. The interior tubular web lines serve to reduce the effect of shear lag on
the column in the middle of the windward and leeward flange frames. The bundled tube concept allows for wider
column spacing in the tubular walls than would be possible with only the exterior framed tube form. It is this
spacing which makes it possible to place interior frame lines without seriously compromising interior space
planning. The ability to modulate vertically can create a powerful vocabulary for a variety of dynamic shapes.
1081
Second Edition
8.1.3.3 In-Plane Stability (Diaphragm Action)
Imagine a floor plan. The stability elements resisting the horizontal forces are situated at a particular location as
shown by the thickened line below in the two orthogonal directions. In horizontal plane bracing must be provided
to resist lateral loads in the two orthogonal directions. To transfer the lateral load (which is applied everywhere
there is a mass) to these vertical stiffness elements, some sort of in plane transfer element is required.
Tie members to transfer Y load
to in horizontal plane truss
girder, which in turn transfers
load to the vertical stability
elements.
Y
Reinforced concrete floors and composite floors provide diaphragm action and hence transfer these lateral
forces to the vertical stability elements. The absence of a reinforced concrete floor results in the need for in
horizontal plane bracing or as a last resort by in horizontal plane moment resisting connection.
The in horizontal plane bracing can be any of the types presented in Section 8.1.4.3 for a simply supported
arrangement and in Section 8.1.3.2.2 for a cantilever arrangement, both deflecting in the horizontal plane. Above,
the stability in the X direction is provided by a simply-supported arrangement with a modified Warren type
bracing. Note that each of the 3 bays must be braced, continuous to the vertical stability system. The stability in the
Y direction is provided by a cantilever arrangement with a combination of Pratt bracing, eccentric Warren
bracing and eccentric V bracing. Again each of the 4 bays must be braced, continuous to the vertical stability
system.
There is also the need for in horizontal plane tie members to transfer the loads to the in horizontal plane truss
girder which in turn transfers load to the vertical stability elements. All columns must be tied in to the framework,
i.e. no part of an independent part of the structure shall be locally unstable. In other words, the existence of
movement joints require that each separate part of the structure be independently stable. Each column should be
effectively held in position by means of horizontal ties in two directions, approximately at right angles, at each
principal floor level supported by that column. Horizontal ties should similarly be provided at roof level, except
where the steelwork only supports cladding that weighs not more than 0.7 kN/m2 and that carries only imposed roof
loads and wind loads. At re-entrant corners the tie members nearest to the edge should be anchored into the steel
framework. All horizontal ties, and all other horizontal members, should be capable of resisting a factored tensile
load, which should not be considered as additive to other loads, of not less than 75 kN. The horizontal ties may be:
• steel members, including those also used for other purposes;
• steel bar reinforcement that is anchored to the steel frame and embedded in concrete;
• steel mesh reinforcement in a composite slab with profiled steel sheeting designed to act compositely with
steel beams, the profiled steel sheets being directly connected to the beams by the shear connectors.
1082
Second Edition
Disproportionate collapse is accounted for as follows.
(a) If effective ties are provided, no other action is needed. To provide effective ties, every frame must be
effectively tied at roof and floors and columns must be restrained in two directions at these levels.
Beam or slab reinforcement may act as ties, which must be capable of resisting a force of 75kN at floor
level and 40kN at roof level. This avoids catastrophic failures like the 1968 Ronan Point collapse.
(b) If ties are not provided, then a check is to be made to see if load bearing members can be removed one
at a time without causing more than a specified amount of damage.
(c) If it is not possible to limit the damage to a specified amount, then the member concerned must be
designed as a “protected” or “key” member. It must be capable of withstanding 34 kN/m2 from any
direction.
1083
Second Edition
1084
Second Edition
8.1.3.4 Torsional Stability System
Vertical stability elements should preferably be positioned symmetrically on plan to avoid torsional effects
especially for tall buildings.
1085
Second Edition
8.1.3.5 Movement Joints
Movement joints are employed in the following cases:-
I. when there is a significant change in the type of foundation

II. when there is a significant change in predicted settlement
III. when there is a significant change in plan configuration
IV. when there is a significant change in the height of the building
V. to break up large structures to avoid large thermal movements
When detailed calculations are not undertaken, joints to permit movement of 15mm to 25mm should be provided
at approximately 50m centres both longitudinally and transversely.
In the top storey, joints should normally be provided to give a 25mm spacing.
1086
Second Edition
8.1.3.6 Transfer Structures
8.1.3.6.1 Transfer Beam
1087
Second Edition
8.1.3.6.2 Transfer Vierendeel
Presented is a study of the design of a transfer vierendeel at concept design on One New Change, London.
Original Proposal
The proposed member sections at the vierendeel are presented. Closed cells of enhanced members are chosen so
that there is a uniform bending and shear load path. All members are rigidly connected for moment transfer except
the floor below the vierendeel as shown pinned below. Mid columns are placed in the bay helping to reduced the
bending moments and shear forces. The width of each bay is 9m with mid-columns separating at mid-span, the
height 3.85m the second floor and above.
Section Size kg/m

Fabricated I
Standard Beam 368.2
700 x 400 x 30 x 35
Universal Column
Standard Column 287.3
356 x 406 x 287
Fabricated I
Enhanced Beam 659.4
700 x 600 x 40 x 50
Fabricated RHS
Enhanced Column 945.1
500 x 500 x 70 x 70
The member utilization to the ULS load case is presented.
1088
Second Edition
The bending moment, shear force and axial effects are presented.
1089
Second Edition
1090
Second Edition
1091
Second Edition
The summary of the critical members is as follows.
Effects Critical Column(s) Critical Beam(s)

All elevation columns directly
next to support within span; All elevation beams directly
Bending moment
Adjacent columns on either next to support within span;
side to a lesser extent;
Shear force As with bending moment; As with bending moment;
Bottom elevation max
Bottom elevation max
compressive beam next to
compressive column on
Axial force support within span; Top
support line; Higher columns
elevation max tensile beam to
to a lesser extent;
lesser extent;
Deflections are a consideration for cladding.
1092
Second Edition
The span to depth for SLS is 1/165 and for live load alone is 1/410.
Tie forces will have to be resisted by some sort of lateral stability system either directly or through diaphragm
action to the lateral stability system.
1093
Second Edition
Parametric Study – Effect of Simply Supported Back Span
On comparison with the original scheme, generally all the members have higher utilization especially the members
in the back span, now simply supported. As for the cantilever members, they also experience greater effects. The
loads in the columns increase. The tie forces stay generally the same.
1094
Second Edition
The deflections at the end of the cantilever also stay generally the same.
Conclusion, this option cannot be more economical.
Parametric Study – Removing Mid-Columns in Back Span
Mid-columns help considerably within span, but to a much lesser extent in the back span.
1095
Second Edition
The utilization is similar with original scheme. Tie force reactions are also similar as is the deflections.
Conclusion, mid-columns in the back span contribute little to the resistance. If at all, it may be sufficient to
incorporate mid-columns in only the first bay in the back span.
Parametric Study – Extending Back Span to Another Bay
Moment connection required between columns and beams within span and to an extent in the back span. An
investigation is undertaken to determine the extent of back span required.
On comparison with the original scheme, generally all the members have similar utilization. The loads in the
columns are also similar as are the tie forces and the deflections at the end of the cantilever.
Conclusion, this option cannot be more economical.
Parametric Study – Vertical Support At Middle of Cantilever
If a vertical support is added, then no enhanced members are required as shown by the utilization sketch below.
1096
Second Edition
The tie forces decrease considerably.
Conclusion
1097
Second Edition
Scheme kg/m2 on Elevation
Original 253
Simply-Supported By inspection greater
Back Span than original scheme
Removing Mid-
237
Columns In Back Span
Extending Back Span to By inspection similar
Another Bay to original scheme
Vertical Support At
186
Middle of Cantilever
Note that the columns have not been optimised, i.e. smaller sections are possible higher up the building. However
the comparison above should still approximately hold.
1098
Second Edition
8.1.3.7 Structural Floor Systems
Structural floor systems could be of
I. Reinforced concrete (Section 8.4.3)

II. Composite steel and reinforced concrete (Section 8.6.3)
III. Prestressed concrete (Section 8.4.4)
1099
Second Edition
8.1.4 Steel, Reinforced Concrete and Masonry Bridges
Typical spans for the different bridge options are presented.
1100
Second Edition
8.1.4.1 Steel and Reinforced Concrete Prismatic (Box or Plate) Girder Bridge
A box girder produces a extremely torsionally stiff structure. This form lends itself well to composite construction
for the top flange, but the box girder bottom flange tends to be embarrassingly wide whilst the plate girder bottom
flange tends to be embarrassingly thick.
Flat girder bridges are commonly built by cantilever erection, in which case the bottom flange has to carry
compression over its whole length.
For wide bridges (dual carriageways; 2 x 3 lanes + shoulders commonly add up to 30m width), the choice may be
between twin boxes or 6 or 8 simple plate girders. The torsional stiffness of the boxes will probably make it
economic to make two single box bridges structurally entirely separate in this case.
As the span increases, dead load becomes relatively more important especially for highway bridges, so lightweight
concrete may be economic for the deck; or even a stiffened steel plate deck. The latter is typically 15mm and
stiffened by pressed steel troughs (roughly 8mm) on a module of 300mm.
300mm
300mm
Simply supported constant depth composite girders for highway loading typically have span to depth of 20,
whilst for railway the ratio is 15. Variable depth are appropriate if spans exceed 30m.
1101
Second Edition
8.1.4.2 Steel and Reinforced Concrete Haunched (Box or Plate) Girder Bridge
For continuous composite girders of variable depth for highways the ratio is 25 at pier and 40 at mid span whilst
those for railway are 30 and 60 respectively.
1102
Second Edition
8.1.4.3 Steel Truss Bridge
Trusses are common for railway bridges due to their high stiffness since trains are much heavier than highway
traffic. Typical load of trains are 80 kN/m per track and locally 4 axles of 250kN at 2m centres.
Instead of explicitly accounting for dynamic effects, simplified dynamic design load is
(1+φ) x static live load
where φ = (V/V*) / (1−V/V*)
where V is the train speed and V* is the speed at which train travels to traverse the entire span in 0.5T where T is
the natural period of the bridge.
The ideal span to depth ratio for trusses is found to be between 10 to 15, with 15 the optimum.
Common planar bridge trusses include
I. Warren Truss; Warren trusses generally provide the most economical solution since their long
compression bracing members can take advantage of the fact that RHS are very efficient in
compression. They have about half the number of bracing members and half the number of
connections to Pratt trusses. Warren trusses are also more open.
II. Modified Warren Truss (i.e. Warren truss with vertical brace elements); The modified Warren
truss (with vertical brace elements) is used when loading is intended within the chord members
instead of just at the joints in order to reduce bending moments in chord. It also is used to reduce
effective buckling lengths of the chords. It can span greater distances than the Warren truss but
uses more material to the Pratt truss.
III. Pratt Truss; Under vertical load, the longer diagonals are in tension and the shorter vertical braces
are in compression. The disadvantage is that the compression chord is more heavily loaded than the
tension chord at midspan. The Howe is the counterpart to the Pratt truss. Ideally, the diagonals
should be designed to be in tension instead of compression. Hence they should be orientated to be
more Pratt-like. Even for multiple spans, the diagonals can be iteratively flipped until all of them
are in tension.
IV. Howe Truss; The Howe truss is the converse to the Pratt truss. An advantage is the fact that the
tension chord is more heavily loaded than the compression chord at midspan under normal vertical
loading. The disadvantage is that, unlike the Pratt truss, the diagonals are in compression.
V. Parker Truss; The Parker truss is a variable depth Pratt truss for structural efficiency. However,
the fabrication cost is high due to variable depth and inclination of webs and top chord.
VI. K or V Truss
1103
Second Edition
VII. Diamond Truss
VIII. Petit Truss; This is a subdivided Pratt or Howe truss.
IX. Vierendeel Truss; This is a moment resisting connection (between the chord and verticals) truss.
Lateral stability in the two vertical planes must be provided. The first vertical plane is the plane of the truss and
naturally the web bracing of the truss or the moment connection (Vierendeel truss) shall provide the stability.
For the second vertical plane, cross sectional stability must be provided to prevent lozenging instability of the
truss. If the deck is the top chord, then concentric bracing can easily be provided in cross section. However, if the
bottom chord is the deck, then open space is required and the lozenging stability of the tubes in cross section must
be provided by either one (or multiples) of the following four options. First, a moment resisting connection in the
cross sectional plane can be provided between the vertical web elements and the top deck cross beams through the
chord. Second, a moment resisting connection in the cross sectional plane can be provided between the vertical
web elements and the bottom deck cross beams through the chord. Third, eccentric portal bracing can be
provided in the cross sectional plane where appropriate and acceptable from an architectural space planning point
of view as shown in cross section view below. Fourth, lateral supports external to the tube can be provided at the
level of the top chord deck at intermediate sections along the bridge.
The lack of a complete set of cross-sectional stability at each node results in the need to provide in-plane stability
(diaphragm action) in the two horizontal planes, i.e. in the plane of the bottom chord and the plane of the top
chord. Diaphragm action needs to be provided by either a reinforced concrete deck, by horizontal plane bracing
(concentric or eccentric) or inefficiently with an in horizontal plane moment resisting connection. These will
allow the transmission of lateral forces (whether nominal, wind or seismic, they are all distributed according to the
mass) in in-plane shear forces to the lateral supports. The in horizontal plane bracing arrangement is similar to that
provided for multi-storey buildings as described in Section 8.1.3.3, only this time, there is only one direction in
plan to brace, i.e. the direction orthogonal to the longitudinal axis of the truss (as the longitudinal direction is
stable since on either side of the solitary bay the vertical plane web bracing of the truss provides stability). Now the
in horizontal plane bracing can be any of the types presented in Section 8.1.4.3 for a simply supported
arrangement and in Section 8.1.3.2.2 for a cantilever arrangement, both deflecting in the horizontal plane.
Below, a combination of bracing arrangements, namely Pratt, V and Warren is shown (some bracing omitted,
should actually be continuous). Of course, this bracing arrangement must be continuous to transfer the forces to
the lateral stability system in the vertical plane. If this arrangement is provided for the top deck, the bracing must be
continuous to the cross-sectional (lozenging) lateral stability system in the vertical plane.
Plan View
1104
Second Edition
The vertical plane cross-sectional bracing is to be placed at certain locations along the length of the truss, i.e. not
necessarily at each and every node location, so long as in-plane stability (diaphragm action) bracing is provided to
span in between. However, if the vertical plane cross-sectional bracing is provided at each and every node location,
a scenario is possible with the moment connection system between the verticals and the bottom deck cross beams,
then clearly there not the need for any in-plane stability (diaphragm action) bracing, as each cross-sectional cell is
stable like a portal frame. However, the resulting U-frame must be checked for global buckling instability.
The modelling of boundary conditions on FE models of trusses must be performed carefully. Since the boundary
conditions are not placed at the neutral axis of the truss, a simply supported truss is simulated when only one
translational restraint is placed longitudinal to the truss. If two longitudinal supports are placed, then a thrust
reaction develops. But then again, if that simulates reality, then so be it.
An buckling effective length factor K = 0.9 can be used for compression chord and K = 0.75 can be used for
compression bracing member.
Trusses are usually made up of hollow structural sections, i.e. rectangular hollow sections (RHS) or circular
hollow sections (CHS) due to nature of loading within the truss elements being primarily axial. Tubular trusses are
hence also lighter than their non-tubular counterparts. The smaller sizes of the members will also reduce protection
costs as their surface area is less. CHS are pleasing to the eye of beholder and offer efficient distribution of steel
about centroidal axes, but specialized profiling is required at the connections. On the contrary, RHS on the other
hand offer easy connection detailing. RHS also offer superior deck or paneling fitting if they are to be laid directly
on the top chord of the truss. RHS are also easier to handle and fabricate in the factory. Brace members must be
smaller in dimension than the chord members in order to avoid complicated connecting pieces. Chord walls should
generally be thick and bracing walls thin for an efficient joint. Connections are usually welded. When connecting
the braces to the chords, overlap weld connections have superior static and fatigue (fatigue is nearly always a
serious consideration in railway truss bridges) strength to gap weld connections. However, usually gap
connections are required if centroid of the brace members are to meet exactly at the centroid of the chord members.
Gap connections are also the preferred option for ease of fabrication, fitting and welding than overlap connections.
The eccentricity, e at the connection between the centerlines of the braces to the chord that may result will have an
effect on the induced bending moments at the joint and the members. This eccentricity moment (calculated
simply by the sum of the bracing member force components parallel to the chord multiplied by the nodal
eccentricity, e) should be added to the effects obtained from the computer analysis in the design of the
compression chord, but may be ignored in the design of the tension chord and the braces. Alternatively, this
eccentricity moment can be explicitly incorporated within the computer analysis by the use of short rigid elements
modelling the eccentricity between the centerline of the chord and the centerlines of the braces.
Another possibility of section choice is to use RHS chords sections and I diagonals. Bolted connections are then
usual. Fatigue (fatigue is nearly always a serious consideration in railway truss bridges) can be minimized in the
main truss action by making the gusset integral with the chord members (i.e. gusset butt welded in shop), provided
with appropriate corner radii and the I-diagonals site bolted to gusset.
1105
Second Edition
Verticals and
Chord Remark
Diagonals
Lightly loaded;
Roof and Floor Angle Angle
Bolted directly; No gusset plate required;
T
Truss
Lightly loaded;
T Angle
Bolted directly; No gusset plate required;
Double Angles
More heavily loaded;
H Channel
Gusset plate bolted connection;
RHS (SHS) RHS (SHS) Welded connection;
RHS (SHS) CHS Welded connection;

Bridge Truss
RHS H Gusset plate bolted connection;
H H
Channel Channel Gusset plate bolted connection;
1106
Second Edition
8.1.4.4 Steel Portal Bridge
1107
Second Edition
8.1.4.5 Steel, Reinforced Concrete or Masonry Arch Bridge
The horizontal thrust at the base of a three pinned arch is (ωL2/8)/H where H is the height to apex.
Plastic collapse analysis is described in Sections 3.3.4.2 and 3.3.6.1.
1108
Second Edition
8.1.4.6 Steel Cable Stayed Bridge
1109
Second Edition
8.1.4.7 Steel Suspension Bridge
The mathematics of a catenary loaded vertically is presented. The following does not account for the change of
curvature due to the stretch in the cables, a nonlinear static analysis is required for that. But the solution is accurate
for well curved cables. Knowing W and S, either T or d must be chosen to solve for the other.
A computer analysis of a catenary loaded vertically requires a (geometrically) nonlinear static analysis, a.k.a.
form-finding. When there is no initial prestress in the cables, a (geometrically) nonlinear static analysis can be
performed with the gravity loads applied on the cable elements (which have defined EA but no EI) until
convergence to the equilibrium position is achieved.
1110
Second Edition
A tension prestressed cable loaded vertically (eg. London Millennium Bridge) provides vertical stiffness to
bending. To be straight the cable must have an initial prestress and theoretically no weight. In order to carry the
weight, the cable needs to sag to a radius R.
Knowing S, W, T0 and EA, T is solved for iteratively using
then the dip, d is worked out by calculating R from
as an intermediate step before it is calculated from the following expression.
By changing estimate of T0, d will change. Straight cables can be used for load carrying, but either the prestress, T0
or the deflection, d will be high.
A computer analysis of a tension prestressed cable loaded vertically requires a (geometrically) nonlinear static
analysis, a.k.a. form-finding. When there is some initial prestress designed into the cables to reduce deflections, a
(geometrically) nonlinear static analysis is performed with the gravity loads applied and some element prestress
loads (simulated with say element temperature loads) applied on the cable elements (which have defined EA but no
EI) until convergence to the equilibrium position is achieved. With the external load, the curvature of the form-
found cable depends on the relative magnitude of the element prestress and the external load. The greater the
prestress in the element, the flatter the form-found geometry.
1111
Second Edition
8.1.5 Steel Towers
1112
Second Edition
8.1.6 Steel Masts
1113
Second Edition
8.1.7 Steel Space Roofs
1114
Second Edition
8.1.8 Steel Cable Roofs
Concepts of cable supported structures that may be relevant are presented in Section 8.1.4.6 and Section8.1.4.7.
For two way cable net structures, approximate calculations can be performed using the single cable equations
presented in Section 8.1.4.6 whilst also employing the following equations.
where P is the load per surface area and t1 and t2 are tension per unit width
where a1 and a2 are the cable spacings and T1 and T2 the cable tensions.
A computer analysis of a steel cable roof requires a (geometrically) nonlinear static analysis, a.k.a. form-finding.
When there is no initial prestress in the cables, a (geometrically) nonlinear static analysis can be performed with
the gravity loads applied on the cable elements (which have defined EA but no EI) until convergence to the
equilibrium position is achieved. Often however, there is some initial prestress designed into the cables to reduce
deflections, in which case a (geometrically) nonlinear static analysis is performed with the gravity loads applied
and some element prestress loads (simulated with say element temperature loads) applied on the cable elements
(which have defined EA but no EI) until convergence to the equilibrium position is achieved. With the external
pressure load, the curvature of the surface form-found depends on the relative magnitude of the element prestress
and the external pressure load. The greater the prestress in the element, the flatter the form-found surface.
1115
Second Edition
8.1.9 Steel Grandstands
8.1.9.1 Cantilever Grandstand
8.1.9.2 Front Girder Grandstand
8.1.9.3 Cable Suspended Grandstand
1116
Second Edition
8.1.10 Reinforced Concrete Shell Roofs
A form-finding computer analysis is often useful in the design of arbitrarily shaped shell roof structures to define a
least surface area shape that meets certain boundary constraints. A (geometrically) nonlinear static analysis can
be performed with a set of displacement restraints and/or supporting elements of definite stiffness properties
defining the boundaries of the required geometry and applying an element prestress force (simulated with say
element temperature loads) on the arbitrary shell structure (which need not have defined EA and certainly not EI
properties). Since there is no external pressure load on the structure, the form-found shape of the structure will be
the shape having least surface area. Since the external pressure is zero, the shape of the structure that is form-
found is not affected by the magnitude of the element pre-stress, so it may be set to any reasonable value.
1117
Second Edition
8.1.11 Timber Single-Storey Buildings

8.1.11.1 Beam – Column (No Pinned or Two-Pinned) Portal Frame
The types of universal beam – universal column portal frame are: -

I. No Pinned (Rigid Bases), Rigid Eaves, Rigid Apex (Statical Indeterminacy, αs = 3)
II. Two Pinned (Pinned Bases), Rigid Eaves, Rigid Apex (Statical Indeterminacy, αs = 1)
Typical rafter and purlin sizes are presented.
1118
Second Edition
8.1.11.2 Beam – Column (Three-Pinned) Portal Frame
The types of universal beam – universal column three pinned portal frame are: -
I. Rigid Bases, Pinned Eaves, Pinned Apex (Statical Indeterminacy, αs = 0)
II. Pinned Bases, Rigid Eaves, Pinned Apex (Statical Indeterminacy, αs = 0)
A three pinned portal frame (pinned at apex and bases) used for a swimming pool is now presented.
The rafters are 178mm wide x 500mm deep members whilst the compression and tension columns are 178mm wide
x 225mm deep LVL members. The loads acting upon the structure are the dead load, superimposed dead load of
0.238kPa (0.23kPa on slope but 0.238kPa on plan) and services of 0.1kPa, wind loading of a certain amount and
live loading snow of 0.6kPa. The purlins transfer the load onto the rafters as point loads.
Compression Column
Tension Column
Pins
The existence of both the compression and tension columns effectively creates a moment connection at the eaves.
1119
Second Edition
8.1.11.3 Truss – Stanchion Portal Frame
The types of truss – stanchion portal frame are: -

I. Rigid Bases, Rigid Eaves (Finite Eaves Depth) (Statical Indeterminacy, αs = 3)
II. Pinned Bases, Rigid Eaves (Finite Eaves Depth) (Statical Indeterminacy, αs = 1)
III. Rigid Bases, Pinned Eaves (No Eaves Depth) (Statical Indeterminacy, αs = 1)
IV. Pinned Bases, Pinned Eaves (No Eaves Depth), Diaphragm Roof To Braced Wall in the Plane of the
Portal Frame (Statical Indeterminacy, αs = −1 Without Diaphragm and Braced Wall)
Domestic Industrial
Truss Span To 16m
Truss Spacing 1.5m to 2.0m centres 5.0m to 6.0m centres
Purlin Type Solid Solid or composite
Purlin Spacing At node positions 0.8 to 1.8m centres
Rafter Cladding Tiles (0.575kPa on slope) Corrugated sheeting
Ceiling Plasterboard and insulation (0.25kPa)
Economy usually results in truss spacing increases with truss span. Transportation is frequently a problem with
large trusses, trusses deeper than 3m and longer than 20m requiring special attention.
BS 5268-3 gives standard member sizes for the chords (rafters and ceiling ties) and for the internal web members
for domestic trussed rafter roofs.
In the vertical plane of the portal frame, lateral stability can be provided by rigid bases (i.e.cantilever columns)
and/or by moment resistance at the eaves for trusses with a finite depth at the eaves. The portal frame can be
pinned base or fixed base. The portal frame must provide moment resistance at the eaves for the pinned base case,
since it becomes a mechanism (4 pinned frame) to lateral loads in the plane of the portal frame otherwise.
1120
Second Edition
With rigid bases and moment resistance at the eaves, the frame is a rigid portal frame, with pinned bases and
moment resistance at the eaves, the frame is a two-pinned portal frame, and with rigid bases and no moment
resistance at the eaves, the frame is a two-pinned portal frame.
Moment resistance at the eaves is provided by the finite depth of the truss. If this is not provided or to further
enhance the capacity of connection if a finite depth is provided, a haunch member can be added.
girder bracing elements at the gable end. The horizontal wind girder is in the plane of the rafter and the vertical
wind girder is located in the same bay to carry the forces into the foundations.
In the plane of the frame, stability

In rafter plane gable end bracing can be provided by moment
connection at the eaves. If this is
not provided (as shown here as
four pinned frames), the rafter
plane of the roof must act as a
diaphragm which transfers the
Braced end wall forces to the braced end wall.
Roof diaphragm
Vertical plane gable end bracing
In the plane orthogonal to frame, stability provided by (in rafter plane)

gable end bracing which transfers the forces to the (vertical plane) gable
end bracing. The purlins act as the tie elements.
The in rafter plane roof diagonals is an efficient bracing system for lateral stability in both the in truss plane and
orthogonal to truss plane directions. For bracing in both directions clearly a 45 degree angle is best. Smaller angles
also cause construction problems.
1121
Second Edition
The design of bracing for parallel beam or parallel truss systems is covered by EC5. A series of n parallel
members which require lateral supports at intermediate nodes A,B, a bracing system should be provided, which, in
addition to the effects of external horizontal load (e.g. wind), should be capable of resisting an internal stability
load per unit length q, as follows
1122
Second Edition
The modification factor kf,3 is approximately 30.0. The horizontal deflection of the bracing system due to force qd
only should not exceed length/750. The horizontal deflection of the bracing system due to force qd and any other
external load (e.g. wind), should not exceed length/500.
An alternative to having roof diagonals is to design a roof diaphragm. The use of sarking on top of the rafters
eliminates the need for bracing, provided the sarking is moisture resistant plywood (minimum thickness 9mm) or
chipboard (minimum thickness 12mm) or 16mm timber boarding.
Additional bracing elements that increase overall stability are

I. Longitudinal bracing at apex and other node points (i.e. purlins)
II. Web chevron bracing
Also, lateral bracing at the mid point of compression members may be required, this however just to avoid local
member buckling.
8.1.11.3.1 Collar Beam Roof
The Collar beam is a three pinned frame roof which must be designed for a thrust at its base as it does not have
a tie element.
8.1.11.3.2 Tied Three Pinned Rafter Roof
1123
Second Edition
A tied three-pinned portal frame roof with the inclusion of an additional dimension results in the tied three-
pinned pyramid roof. The structure is an assembly/drama building.
Purlins
Tied (by edge beam) three-

pinned hip rafter
The pyramid roof consists of two diagonal main hip rafters 150mm x 650mm LVL. The hip rafter is a tied three-
pinned frame system. They are restrained in LTB and minor axis flexural buckling at the locations of the purlins
which are 75mm x 500mm LVL. They are not restrained to flexural buckling in the major axis. The ring beam acts
as the tie in tension for the horizontal thrust of the three-pinned frame. The horizontal thrust is resolved in the
perpendicular directions as tension into the ring beam.
The self-contained tied three pinned frame system rests on 200mm masonry walls. The loads acting upon the
structure are the dead load, superimposed dead load consisting of roof coverings (tiles, felt, battens, insulation) of
0.93kPa (0.8kPa on slope but 0.93kPa on plan) and services of 0.2kPa, wind loading of a certain amount and live
loading snow of 0.6kPa. The purlins transfer the load onto the rafters as point loads.
8.1.11.3.3 Traditional Swiss, German, Compound Swiss, Scissor Trusses
The Swiss, German, Compound Swiss and Scissor trusses are presented.
1124
Second Edition
8.1.11.3.4 Mono-Pitch Warren Truss
Spans to 9m.
Span to depth to 4.
Purlins should be placed at node points to avoid secondary bending on the chord rafter.
8.1.11.3.5 Fink Truss
Span to depth to 8.
Coefficients which multiply the top chord point loads W or a unit load at the apex to get the member axial force are
presented.
1125
Second Edition
1126
Second Edition
8.1.11.3.6 Variable Depth Warren Truss
Spans to 12m (domestic) and 15m

(industrial).
Span to depth to 8.
Purlins should be placed at node points to avoid secondary bending on the chord rafter.
8.1.11.3.7 Variable Depth Howe Truss and Pratt Truss
Span to depth to 8.
Coefficients which multiply the top and bottom chord point loads W and Wc or a unit load at the apex to get the
member axial force on a variable depth Howe truss are presented.
1127
Second Edition
1128
Second Edition
Coefficients which multiply the top and bottom chord point loads W and Wc or a unit load at the apex to get the
member axial force on a variable depth Pratt truss are presented.
1129
Second Edition
8.1.11.3.8 Parallel Chord (Constant Depth) Warren Truss
Span to depth to 10.
Coefficients which multiply the top and bottom chord point loads W and Wc or a unit load middle of the bottom
chord to get the member axial force on a Warren truss are presented.
1130
Second Edition
1131
Second Edition
8.1.11.3.9 Parallel Chord (Constant Depth) Howe Truss and Pratt Truss
Presented is the Howe truss. The Pratt truss have got the diagonals flipped. The former have diagonals in
compression under downward gravity whilst the latter have them in tension. The reverse is true for wind uplift.
Spans to 30m (industrial).

With parallel chord trusses, unlike variable depth trusses, the loads in the web members are frequently very large
which causes some difficulty in providing adequate connections. The coefficients are shown below for a typical
span to depth just to compare the values on the web members.
The Pratt truss can also be variable depth to form a Spandrel truss.
1132
Second Edition
With a parallel chord Pratt truss, when they are joined to a timber or steel column with connections at both the
top and bottom chords, this effectively gives rotational fixity in a building subject to sway, the system then
effectively becoming a two-pinned base portal frame assuming that the bases are pinned. On the other hand,
when it is required to minimize the height of the perimeter wall, the Howe truss is favoured, and to provide the
lateral stability in the plane of the truss, rigid bases are required or a roof diaphragm to span walls or bracings in the
plane of the frame.
Pratt Truss Howe Truss

To model the parallel roof truss with a finite depth of eaves all members, the following is undertaken. The columns
are modeled with beam elements with no rotational releases, although it is pinned at the bases. All the web
elements are rotationally released on either end. Also, the chord elements adjacent to the columns are also released
rotationally. This models a truss with its individual members pinned onto a continuous column, but because of the
finite depth, effectively moment resisting at the eaves. Apart from local element bending, no element is then subject
to bending moments, except for the columns.
1133
Second Edition
Coefficients which multiply the top and bottom chord point loads W and Wc or a unit load at the middle of the top
chord to get the member axial force on a Howe truss are presented.
1134
Second Edition
Coefficients which multiply the top and bottom chord point loads W and Wc or a unit load at the middle of the top
chord to get the member axial force on a Pratt truss are presented.
1135
Second Edition
1136
Second Edition
8.1.11.3.10 Bowstring (Variable Depth Modified Warren) Truss

The bowstring truss can be very economical for large span industrial applications. It is the current alternative to the
traditional nailed Belfast truss.
With uniform loading and no large concentrated loads, the arched top chord profile supports almost all the
applied loading. A parabolic profile is most efficient theoretically for uniform loading, but practical
manufacturing considerations usually make it more convenient or necessary to adopt a circular profile.
Purlins can be placed between node points deliberately to offset the moment caused by the product of the axial
tangential loading and the eccentricity of the chord.
1137
Second Edition
The Bowstring truss can also have a curved bottom chord to form a Crescent truss.
8.1.11.3.11 Mansard (Variable Depth Modified Warren) Truss

The bowstring truss has the disadvantage of requiring curved members, this adding to manufacturing and erection
costs. The Mansard is then an option to overcome this problem with straight chord members.
1138
Second Edition
8.1.12 Timber Multi-Storey Buildings

8.1.12.1 Timber Floors
Typical span to depth ratios for timber are presented.
Typical joists for floor and flat roofs are presented.
1139
Second Edition
8.1.13 Masonry Single- and Multi-Storey Buildings
8.1.13.1 Lateral Stability Systems
Masonry walls must be at least 150mm thick.
1140
Second Edition
8.2 Appreciation of Loading, ULS and SLS Load Cases
8.2.1 Load Cases
Approximate appreciation of loads is paramount to the structural engineer. Roughly, 1MN is 100 tonnes and 1
tonne is 10kN. A light car weighs about 1 tonne (10kN) whilst a very heavy person weighs about 0.1 tonnes (1kN).
The Imperial College Queens Tower may weigh 9000 tonnes (90000kN), the offshore Sakhalin II PA-B gravity
platform may weigh 130,000 tonnes (1300MN), whilst the Heathrow Terminal 5 Visual Control Tower may weigh
just 800 tonnes (8000kN). The force being applied onto a 2.1m diameter, 20m long pile underneath the London St.
Pancras underground extension may be 800 tonnes (8MN).
Load cases are that must be considered are presented.
Dead load (BS 6399-1)

Superimposed dead load (BS 6399-1)
Live load (BS 6399-1)
Wind load (as described in Section 5.4)
Snow load (BS 6399-3)
Thermal load
Gas and bomb explosions (as described in Section 4.9.2)
Vehicle Impact (as described in Section 4.9.3)
Notional Horizontal Load (BS 5950-1:2000)
Disproportionate Collapse (as described in Section 8.1.3.3)
Fire Protection Period
Typical densities for the dead load values are presented.
Normal Weight Concrete = 24.0 kN/m3
1141
Second Edition
Light Weight Concrete = 19.0 kN/m3

Steel = 78.5 kN/m3
Water = 9.8 kN/m3
Typical superimposed dead load (SDL) are presented.
Flooring (timber) = 0.25 kN/m2

Floor finish (75mm screed) = 1.8 kN/m2
Raised floor = 0.5 kN/m2
Ceiling boards = 0.4 kN/m2

Ceiling with acoustic panel = 0.5 kN/m2
False ceiling = 0.25 kN/m2
Services (nominal) = 0.25 kN/m2

Services (HVAC) = 0.4 kN/m2
Demountable lightweight partitions = 1.0 kN/m2

Blockwork partitions = 2.5 kN/m2
External curtain walling and glazing = 0.5 kN/m2 on elevation

External cavity walls (lightweight block/brick) = 3.5 kN/m2 on elevation
1142
Second Edition
Typical live loads based on BS 6399-1 are presented.
Residential (domestic) = 1.5 kN/m2

Hotel bedrooms = 2.0 kN/m2
Hospital wards = 2.0 kN/m2
Public dining rooms, lounges, cafes, restaurants = 2.0 kN/m2
Car park = 2.5 kN/m2
Normal office = 2.5 kN/m2 + 1.0kN/m2 for demountable partitions
Classroom = 3.0 kN/m2
Laboratories = 3.0 kN/m2
Stairs, corridors, landings, aisles, balconies = 4.0 kN/m2
Retail = 4.0 kN/m2 + 1.0kN/m2 for demountable partitions
Assembly areas = 5.0 kN/m2
High-spec office = 4.0 to 5.0 kN/m2 + 1.0kN/m2 for demountable partitions
Office file rooms = 5.0 kN/m2
Factories and workshops = 5.0 kN/m2
Dance halls, gymnasia = 5.0 kN/m2
Concert halls = 5.0 kN/m2
Libraries = 7.5 kN/m2
Escape routes = 7.5 kN/m2
Plant Room = 7.5 kN/m2
1143
Second Edition
Live loadings based on EC1 Part 1:2002 is presented.
1144
Second Edition
Typical snow load is 0.6 kN/m2.
Another load case is the Notional Horizontal Forces (NHF) which must also be accounted for to allow for the
effects of practical imperfections such as lack of verticality. Notional Horizontal Forces is 0.5% of the factored
vertical (1.4DL+1.4SDL+1.6LL) load (BS5950) or 1.5% of the factored vertical (1.0DL+1.4SDL) load
(BS8110).
Fire protection period is presented.
1145
Second Edition
1146
Second Edition
8.2.2 Load Factors
The load factors according to BS 5950-Part 1:2000 are presented. BS 5950-Part 1:2000 generally specifies ULS
load factors of 1.6, 1.4 and 1.4 for live, dead and wind loads.
1147
Second Edition
8.2.3 Load Combinations
Combinations of firstly dead and live, secondly dead and wind and thirdly dead, live and wind load must be
considered. The British Standard ULS load combinations are
Combination 1A: 1.4Dead + 1.4SDL + 1.6Live + 1.6Snow

Combination 1B: 1.4Dead + 1.4SDL + 1.6Live + 1.6Snow ± 1.0NHF
Combination 2A: 1.4Dead + 1.4SDL ± 1.4mWind (1.4mWind > % (1.4 or 1.0) Dead)
Combination 2B: 1.0Dead + 1.0SDL ± 1.4mWind (1.4mWind > % (1.0 or 1.0) Dead)
Combination 3: 1.2Dead + 1.2SDL + 1.2Live + 1.2Snow ± 1.2mWind (1.2mWind > % (1.2 or 1.0) Dead)
The % of Dead that the wind is limited to is 1.0% (BS 5950) or 1.5% (BS8110). The factors applied to this Dead
above again refer to BS5950 or BS8110. The P-∆ amplification factor m can be calculated using the simplified
Amplified Sway Method as described in Section 3.1.6.7.
The British Standard SLS load combination is
Combination 1: 1.0Dead + 1.0SDL + 1.0Live + 1.0Snow + 1.0Wind
The Eurocode ULS load combinations (with live load including the usual variable live load, wind, snow and
temperature load) are
Combination 1: 1.35Dead + 1.35SDL + γpPrestress + 1.5Livei +1.5ψ0Liveother i
The Eurocode SLS load combinations (with live load including the usual variable live load, wind, snow and
temperature load) are
Combination 1: 1.0Dead + 1.0SDL + 1.0Prestress + 1.0Livei +1.0ψ0Liveother i

Combination 2: 1.0Dead + 1.0SDL + 1.0Prestress + 1.0ψ1Livei +1.0ψ2Liveother i
Combination 3: 1.0Dead + 1.0SDL + 1.0Prestress + 1.0ψ2Live
1148
Second Edition
The French Standard ULS load combination is
Combination 1A: 1.35(Dead + Temp) + 1.5Live

Combination 1B: 1.35(Dead + Temp) + 1.5Snow
Combination 1C: 1.35(Dead + Temp) + 1.5Wind
Combination 2A: 1.35(Dead + Temp) + 1.4(Live + Snow)
Combination 2B: 1.35(Dead + Temp) + 1.4(Live + Wind)
Combination 3: 1.35(Dead + Temp) + 1.35(Live + Snow + Wind)
Combination 4: 1.0(Dead + Temp) + 1.0(Live + Snow + Extreme Wind)
The factored loads should be applied in the most unfavourable realistic combination for the part or effect under
consideration. In each load combination, a γf factor of 1.0 should be applied to dead load (and live load too if
relevant) that counteracts the effects produced by other loads as follows.
I. Wind uplift
II. Sliding, overturning and tension in gravity resisting members due to lateral wind and lateral NHF
Non uniform load combinations that produce the most severe effects should also be considered.
I. Factored live and dead loading on alternate bays, others 1.0 dead load
For the envelope of these combination cases (which are really factored combinations of the individual load cases),
contour plots can only present either the maximum positive or minimum negative value at a time. That being the
case, the alternative to presenting two plots is to present the signed absolute value which automatically accounts
for the maximum positive and minimum negative in one plot.
1149
Second Edition
8.3 Standard Construction Material Properties
Typically, the engineering stress-strain curve is used where the applied load is divided by the original area. In
actuality, a decrease in cross-sectional area occurs (necking), causing the true stress-strain curve to exhibit higher
stresses. Hence the engineering stress-strain curve is conservative.
The engineering strain is the average linear strain obtained from
The engineering stress is as follows for yield and ultimate
The true strain (up to onset of necking) is
True stress (up to onset of necking) is
True strain (beyond necking) is
Beyond necking, true stress must be calculated from actual measurements of load and instantaneous cross-sectional area
from
8.3.1 Steel, Aluminium and Concrete
Property Steel Aluminium Concrete

Yield Strength, σy
Yield Strength, σy
BS EN 10025 S275 – 275
Tensile Strength (MPa) EN 485-2 AW2104-T4 – 240 Negligible.
BS EN 10025 S355 – 355
EN 485-2 AW2104-T6 – 390
BS EN 10137 S460 – 460
Yield Strength, σy Yield Strength, σy Ultimate Strength,
Compressive Strength
BS EN 10025 S275 – 275 EN 485-2 AW2104-T4 – 240 σult
(MPa)
BS EN 10025 S355 – 355 EN 485-2 AW2104-T6 – 390 30 to 50
1150
Second Edition
BS EN 10137 S460 – 460
Hardening Modulus BS EN 10025 S275 – 1140 EN 485-2 AW2104-T4 – 1630

(MPa) BS EN 10025 S355 – 1230 EN 485-2 AW2104-T6 – 1224
BS EN 10025 S275 – 1.0 EN 485-2 AW2104-T4 – 1.0
Hardening Parameter
BS EN 10025 S355 – 1.0 EN 485-2 AW2104-T6 – 1.0
BS EN 10025 S275 – 0.199
EN 485-2 AW2104-T4 – 0.131
Ultimate Failure Strain BS EN 10025 S355 – 0.199 0.0035
EN 485-2 AW2104-T6 – 0.068
NB. Yield strain 0.0020
Short term:
E = 28.0
E: 205.0 E: 70.0 G = 11.7
Stiffness (GPa) G: 76.9 G: 26.1 Long term:
Steel is isotropic. Aluminium is isotropic. E = 14.0
G = 5.8
Concrete is isotropic.
Poisson’s Ratio, ν 0.3 0.33 0.2
Density, ρ (kg/m3) 7850 2700 2400

Material Cost
₤ / kg
Expansion, α 1.2E-5 2.3E-5 1.0E-5
(Strain/°C)
Impact Resistance
Susceptible. See Section Not susceptible because of
(Brittle Failure Not susceptible.
6.3.28.2.2. crystalline structure.
Toughness)
Susceptible. See Section Not susceptible in
Fatigue Susceptible. See Section 5.5.
5.5. compression.
Fire
Corrosion Resistance
Creep
Conductivity at 20°C, λ 140
(W/m°C)
Heat Capacity, c
1000
(J/kg°C)
Electrical Conductivity
Chemical Resistance
UV Resistance
Sustainability
Frequency
1151
Second Edition
Electromagnetic
Considerations
Mild Steel with Typical Cowper-Symonds Strain-Rate Parameters
Young’s Modulus 2.1e+05 N/mm² 2.1e+11 N/m²
Yield Stress 200 N/mm² 2.0e+08 N/m²
Hardening Modulus 500 N/mm² 5.0e+08 N/m²
Hardening Parameter 1.0 1.0
Strain-rate Parameter C 1300 strain/s 1300 strain/s
Strain-rate Parameter P 5.0 5.0
Failure Strain No failure strain used No failure strain used
Steel Grade 275 Strain-Rate Curves
8.3.2 Stainless Steel
Stainless Steel 1.4306 (Roughly Equivalent to AISI 304L) BS EN 10088-2
1152
Second Edition
Failure Strain 0.372 0.372
Stainless Steel 1.4404 (Roughly Equivalent to AISI 316L) BS EN 10088-2
Failure Strain 0.336 0.336
Stainless Steel 316L True Stress-Strain Curve
Density 7.65 x 10-9 tonnes/mm³ (7.65 tonnes/m³)

Young’s Modulus 200 000 N/mm² (200 GPa)
Poisson’s Ratio 0.3
Yield Stress 260 N/mm² (260 MPa)
Effective
0 0.002 0.01 0.0472 0.2135 0.335 0.4261 0.6
Plastic Strain
Effective
260 311 347 445 741 898 983 983
Stress (MPa)
Stainless Steel Bolt A2-70
The piecewise linear plasticity stress-strain material model for stainless steel material A2-70 parameters are as
follows.
Density 7.69 x 10-9 tonnes/mm³ (7.69 tonnes/m³)
Young’s Modulus 200 000 N/mm² (200 GPa)
Poisson’s Ratio 0.3
Yield Stress 600 N/mm² (600 MPa)
Material A2-70
Effective Plastic Strain 0 0.00 0.01 0.04 0.09 0.14 0.19 0.247
Effective Stress (MPa) 600 5
720 8
780 1
820 7
890 7
930 7
950 970
Strain-rate enhancement of the yield stress accounted for using the Cowper-Symonds model
1153
Second Edition
1
 ε& P
1+  
C
where ε&is strain-rate. The C and P values used for the bolts are given below
Material C P
A2-70 300 1.7
The ‘static’ (corresponding to a very low strain-rate of about 1.0E-6) failure plastic strain is 0.61. The factors upon
which this value is scaled for higher strain-rates are as follows.
Factor on Plastic
Strain-rate Plastic Failure Strain
Failure Strain
0.0 1.0 0.61
1.00E-06 1.0 0.61
0.001 1.0 0.61
3.0 0.82 0.50
10.0 0.71 0.43
10000.0 0.71 0.43
1154
Second Edition
The basic design strength, py may generally be taken as the 0.2% proof stress given above as those are minimum
values. The exception is Duplex 2205 where a maximum of 450N/mm² should be used and this should be verified
by mill certificates. For duplex 2205 with thickness 10<t<20mm a material safety factor of 1.05 should be used.
Alternatively based on tensile tests py = σ0.2/1.1 where σ0.2 is the average test value of the 0.2% proof stress. If mill
certificates are used py = σm0.2 /1.2 where σm0.2 is the average value of the 0.2% proof stress as given on the mill
certificate or release note.
1155
Second Edition
8.3.3 Cast Iron
Cast iron is a brittle material and hence employs a Mohr-Coulomb failure criteria. Typical values of density,
Young’s modulus, E, and Poisson ratio are 7890kgm-3, 160.0GPa and 0.25 respectively and the stress-strain curve
1156
Second Edition
is presented below 28. The tensile yield stress is 5.0MPa whereas the compressive yield stress is 200.0MPa. Note
that the E value recommended in BD21/01 (average) and the Railtrack Line Code of Practice is 114GPa.
Measured stress v.s. plastic strain
400
200
0
Stress [MPa]
-200
-400
-600
-800
-0.012 -0.010 -0.008 -0.006 -0.004 -0.002 0.000 0.002 0.004 0.006
Strain
Note that “strain” for the material curves refers to effective plastic strain.
A factor of safety of 5 on the ultimate strength is usually suggested for use in compressive resistance equations and
hence buckling formulae.
8.3.4 Wrought Iron
Typical stress-strain behaviour of wrought iron (which is more ductile than cast iron) is presented 29.
28
Steel Construction Institute. Appraisal of Existing Iron and Steel Structures. Publication 138, 1997.
29
Steel Construction Institute. Appraisal of Existing Iron and Steel Structures. Publication 138, 1997.
1157
Second Edition
1158
Second Edition
8.4 Reinforced Concrete Design to BS 8110-Part 1:1997 (Buildings) and BS 5400-Part 4 (Bridges)
8.4.1 ULS Rectangular Beam Design – Bending, Shear and Torsion Effects
8.4.1.1 Bending Effects
Characteristic Strength of Concrete fcu = 30 to 50 MPa

Yield Strength of Longitudinal Steel, fy = 460 MPa
Partial Safety Factor for Concrete, γmc = 1.5
Partial Safety Factor for Steel, γms = 1.15
Young’s Modulus for Steel, Es = 2.05E11 N/m2
Yield Steel Design Stress, (fy / γms)
Ultimate Concrete Design Stress, 0.67fcu / γmc
Design Steel Yield Strain εy = (fy / γms) / Es
Design Ultimate Strain for Concrete (all grades), εcc
Effective Depth of Section, d
Total Depth of Section, h
Width of Section, b
The depth of plastic neutral axis, x needs to be limited for an under reinforced section. In an under-reinforced
section the failure occurs with the gradual yielding of the tension steel and not by the sudden catastrophic
compression failure of the concrete. Thus the steel εy must be reached before the concrete εcc is reached such that
the steel yields in tension before the concrete yields in compression. Hence basically, the lower the x value the
more under-reinforced the section is. Theoretical limit (by similar triangles) for the depth of the plastic neutral axis,
x = d / (1+ εy/εcc) to ensure under-reinforced section (value not used in design). Limit (maximum) of depth of
plastic neutral axis based on the code (conservative), x = (βb - 0.4)d (value used in design).
The maximum moment capacity is obtained when the maximum neutral axis depth is used whilst still maintaining
an under-reinforced section. If the moment capacity M1 at this stage is less than the design moment, then either
increase section dimension or employ compression steel. Check if compression steel is required by computing
moment capacity M1 = Fcc.z = (0.67fcu/γmc).(0.9b.x).(d-0.45x) with x = (βb - 0.4)d; If M1 > Md then design as singly
reinforced, but if M1 < Md then design as doubly reinforced.
Design as singly reinforced. Define K=Md/fcubd2. Required lever arm z in order to resist the ultimate design
moment Md, z = d[0.5+SQRT(0.25-K.γmc/1.34)]. Lower limit of z from z = d - 0.45x enforcing under-reinforced
limit x = (βb –0.4)d. Upper limit of z of 0.95d to avoid rupture of the tensile reinforcement at failure. Area of
tension steel required to resist this moment Md, As = γms.Md/(fy.z). Check 100As / bh < 4.0. Check 100As / bh >
0.13 for high-yield steel (note 0.24 for mild steel).
Analysis of singly reinforced section. Assuming that the tensile reinforcement steel has yielded at ULS (i.e.
under-reinforced), the depth of neutral axis x obtained from equilibrium, Fcc = Fst, i.e. (0.67fcu/γmc).(0.9bx) =
(fy/γms).(As provided). Ensure section is under reinforced, i.e. x < (βb - 0.4) and x < d / (1+ εy/εcc). Plastic moment
capacity assuming tensile steel has yielded at ULS (under-reinforced), Mcapacity = Fcc.z = (0.67.fcu/γmc).(0.9bx).(d-
0.45x).
Design as doubly reinforced. To increase the moment capacity of the section, either use a bigger section or
provide compression reinforcement. Thus design for a doubly reinforced section only if the moment capacity if not
sufficient to accommodate the design moment in a depth limited section. Let Md = M1 + M2. Moment capacity of
singly reinforced section, M1 = Fcc.z = (0.67fcu/γmc).(0.9b.x).(d-0.45x) with x = (βb - 0.4)d. Area of steel to resist
M1, As1 from M1 = Fst . z = (fy/γms).As1.(d-0.45x). Additional moment that needs to be resisted, M2 = Md - M1.
Depth to compression reinforcement, d'. Ensure compression steel has yielded when concrete yields, i.e. ensure εcu
(x-d')/x > εy. Provide additional steel at both top and bottom, As2 from M2 = (fy/γms).As2.(d-d'). Area of tensile
reinforcement required, Ast = As1 + As2. Area of compression reinforcement required, Asc = As2.
1159
Second Edition
Analysis of doubly reinforced section. Assuming that the tensile and compression reinforcement steel has yielded
at ULS (i.e. under-reinforced), the depth of neutral axis x obtained from equilibrium, Fcc + Fsc = Fst, i.e.
(0.67fcu/γmc).(0.9bx) + (fy/γms).(As2) = (fy/γms).(As1 + As2). Check if tensile steel has yielded at ULS (for under-
reinforced section) εst = εcc(d-x)/x > εy. Check if compression steel has yielded at ULS (for under-reinforced
section) esc = εcc(x-d')/x > εy. Plastic moment capacity assuming tensile and compression reinforcement steel has
yielded at ULS (under-reinforced), Mcapacity = Fcc.z + Fsc.(d-d') = (0.67.fcu/γmc).(0.9bx).(d-0.45x) + (fy/γms).(As2) (d-
d').
The assumption in beams is that all the longitudinal normal stress arises due to bending, hence ignoring
contribution from the axial force. Ensure Compressive Axial Force < 0.1fcc bh. If Compressive Axial Force > 0.1fcc
bh such as in columns, then generate M-N diagram. The M-N diagram depicts that with a little axial compression,
the bending moment capacity is increased because failure in tension due to bending governs. But with even more
axial compression, the bending resistance decreases as the failure in compression due to the axial force governs.
P/(fcubh)
Failure in compression (axial governs)
Failure in tension (bending governs)
M/(fcubh2)
ULTIMATE LIMIT STATE DESIGN OF RECTANGULAR RC SECTION BS 8110-Part 1:1997

Concrete and Steel Material Stress-Strain Curve
Comments Units Reference
Basic User Data
Characteristic Strength of Concrete fcu 50 MPa
Yield Strength of Steel, fy 460 MPa Table 3.1 BS8110-1:1997
Partial Safety Factor Concrete, γmc 1.5 Table 2.2 BS8110-1:1997
Partial Safety Factor Steel, γms 1.15 Table 2.2 BS8110-1:1997
Material Stress-Strain Curve

Youngs Modulus For Steel, Es 200000 MPa
Yield Steel Design Stress, (fy / γms) 400.0 MPa
Ultimate Concrete Design Stress, 0.67fcu / γmc 22.3 MPa Figure 2.1 BS8110-1:1997
Design Steel Yield Strain εy = (fy / γms) / Es 0.0020 Figure 2.2 BS8110-1:1997
Design Ultimate Strain For Concrete (all grades), εcc 0.0035 Figure 2.1 BS8110-1:1997
Assumptions:-
(1) Plane Sections Remain Plane, i.e. not so deep beam
(2) All tension carried by steel rebars as concrete cracks in tensile region
Section Dimensions
Effective Depth, d (Based on Span/d Ratio (12 Simply, 6 Cantilever, 15
Continuous)) 484 mm
Total depth of section, h 600 mm
Width, b (Based on 1/3 < b/d < 2/3, say b = d/2) 1500 mm
Nominal Cover, Cnom 40 mm Clause 3.3 BS8110-1:1997
1160
Second Edition
Check for Under-Reinforced Section Based on Linear Strain Distribution Diagram
The depth of plastic neutral axis, x needs to be limited for an under reinforced section. In a under-reinforced section the failure occurs with the
gradual yielding of the tension steel and not by the sudden catastrophic compression failure of the concrete. Thus εy must be reached before εcc
is reached such that the steel yields in tension before the concrete yields in compression. Hence basically, the lower the x value the more under-
reinforced the section is.
Theoretical limit (by similar triangles) for the depth of the plastic neutral axis, x = d /
(1+ εy/εcc) to ensure under-reinforced section (value not used in design) 308 mm
Degree of moment redistribution for formation of plastic hinges, providing adequate

rotation at the critical sections 0.00 % Table 3.6 BS8110-1:1997
Limit (maximum) of depth of plastic neutral axis based on the code (conservative), x Clause 3.2.2 BS8110-
= (βb - 0.4)d (value used in design) 290OK mm 1:1997
Design Ultimate Plastic Moment Capacity Based on Rectangular 0.9x Concrete Compression Stress Block
Ultimate Design Moment To Be Resisted Md 1070 kNm
(a) Check required design whether singly or doubly reinforced
The maximum moment capacity is obtained when the maximum neutral axis depth
is used whilst still maintaining an under-reinforced section. If the moment capacity
M1 at this stage is less than the design moment, then either increase section
dimension or employ compression steel.
Check if compression steel is required by computing moment capacity M1 = Fcc.z =

No Need Compression Steel
(0.67fcu/γmc).(0.9b.x).(d-0.45x) with x = (βb - 0.4)d; If M1 > Md then design as
singly reinforced, but if M1 < Md then design as doubly reinforced.
(b) Design as a Singly Reinforced Section

Clause 3.4.4.4 BS8110-
Define K = Md /fcu bd2 0.061 1:1997
Required lever arm z in order to resist the ultimate design moment Md, z = Clause 3.4.4.4 BS8110-
d[0.5+SQRT(0.25-K.γmc/1.34)] 448 mm 1:1997
Clause 3.2.2 BS8110-
Lower limit of z from z = d - 0.45x enforcing under-reinforced limit x = (βb - 0.4)d 353OK mm 1:1997
Clause 3.4.4.4 BS8110-
Upper limit of z of 0.95d to avoid rupture of the tensile reinforcement at failure 460OK mm 1:1997
Clause 3.4.4.4 BS8110-
Area of tension steel required to resist this moment Md, As = γms.Md/(fy.z) 5966 mm2 1:1997
Diameter of Rebars 32OK mm
Number of Rebars Required 9
Area Provided 7238OK mm2
Check 100As / bh < 4.0 0.80OK %
Check 100As / bh > 0.13 for high-yield steel (note 0.24 for mild steel) 0.80OK %
(c) Analysis of the Singly Reinforced Section Provided

Area of steel provided as above 7238 mm2
Assuming that the tensile reinforcement steel has yielded at ULS (i.e. under-
reinforced), the depth of neutral axis x obtained from equilibrium, Fcc = Fst, i.e.
(0.67fcu/γmc).(0.9bx) = (fy/γms).(As provided)
96 mm
Ensure section is under reinforced, i.e. x < (βb - 0.4) and x < d / (1+ εy/εcc) OKCheck
Plastic Moment Capacity assuming tensile steel has yielded at ULS (under-
reinforced), Mcapacity = Fcc . z = (0.67.fcu / γmc ).(0.9bx).(d-0.45x) 1276 OK kNm
1161
Second Edition
Moment redistribution factor available whilst maintaining section as under

reinforced, βb >= 0.4 + x/d ensuring βb >= 0.7 0.7
(d) Analysis of Singly Reinforced Flanged Section

Width of web, bw 300 mm
Effective width, beff = b as above = bw + 0.2Lz (internal beam) or bw + 0.1Lz (end
beam) 1500 mm
Thickness of flange, t 150 mm
Area of steel provided as above 7238 mm2
(d)(i) Assume stress block within flange

The moment capacity is the same as that of above for the perfectly rectangular
section
Check stress block within flange, i.e. 0.9x < t OK
(d)(ii) Assume stress block within web
Assuming that the tensile reinforcement steel has yielded at ULS, the depth of
neutral axis x obtained from equilibrium, Fcflange + Fcweb = Fst, i.e.
(0.67fcu/γmc).beff.t + (0.67fcu/γmc).(0.9x-t)bw = (fy/γms).As
-186.5 mm
Ensure section is under reinforced, i.e. x < (βb - 0.4) and x < d / (1+ εy/εcc) OK
Plastic Moment Capacity assuming tensile steel has yielded at ULS (under-
reinforced), Mcapacity = Fcflange.(d-0.5t) + Fweb.(d-0.5(0.9x+t)) = (0.67.fcu /
γmc).(beff.t).(d-0.5t) + (0.67.fcu / γmc)(0.9x-t)bw.(d-0.5(0.9x+t))
1005 kNm
Check stress block within web, i.e. 0.9x > t
Warning
(e) Design as a Doubly Reinforced Section

To increase the moment capacity of the section either use a bigger section or provide compression reinforcement. Thus design for a doubly
reinforced section only if the moment capacity if not sufficient to accommodate the design moment in a depth limited section. Let Mcapacity = M1
+ M2
Moment capacity of singly reinforced section, M1 = Fcc.z =

3094 kNm
(0.67fcu/γmc).(0.9b.x).(d-0.45x) with x = (βb - 0.4)d
Area of steel to resist M1, As1 from M1 = Fst . z = (fy/γms).As1.(d-0.45x) 21889 mm2
Additional moment that needs to be resisted, M2 = Md - M1 -2024 kNm
Depth to compression reinforcement, d' 50 mm
Ensure compression steel has yielded when concrete yields, i.e. ensure εcu (x-d')/x
> εy OKCheck
Provide additional steel at both top and bottom, As2 from M2 = (fy/γms).As2.(d-d') -11656 mm2
Area of tensile reinforcement required, Ast = As1 + As2 10233 mm2
2
Area Provided 2413Warning mm
2
Area of compression reinforcement required, Asc = As2 -11656 mm
Area Provided 628OK mm2
(f) Analysis of the Doubly Reinforced Section Provided

Area of steel Ast provided as above 628 mm2
Area of steel Asc provided as above 2413 mm2
Assuming that the tensile and compression reinforcement steel has yielded at ULS
(i.e. under-reinforced), the depth of neutral axis x obtained from equilibrium, Fcc + 24 mm
1162
Second Edition
Fsc = Fst, i.e. (0.67fcu/γmc).(0.9bx) + (fy/γms).(As2) = (fy/γms).(As1 + As2)
Check if tensile steel has yielded at ULS (for under-reinforced section) εst = εcc(d-
x)/x > εy OKCheck
Check if compression steel has yielded at ULS (for under-reinforced section) εsc =
εcc(x-d')/x > εy WarningCheck
Plastic Moment Capacity assuming tensile and compression reinforcement steel

has yielded at ULS (under-reinforced), Mcapacity = Fcc . z + Fsc . (d-d') = (0.67.fcu
/ γmc ).(0.9bx).(d-0.45x) + (fy/γms).(As2) (d-d')
447 kNm
(g) Analysis of the Doubly Reinforced Flanged Section
(h) Check if there is significant compressive axial force within section

The assumption in beams is that all the longitudinal normal stress arises due to
bending, hence ignoring contribution from the axial force.
Compressive Axial Force 3200Entered kN

Ensure Compressive Axial Force < 0.1fcc bh ~ 0.1fcc b (d + Cnom) OKCheck
Design For Combined Bending and Tensile or Compressive Axial Force

This requires the generation of the M-N diagram
1163
Second Edition
8.4.1.2 Shear and Torsion Effects
Characteristic Strength of Concrete fcu = 30 to 50 MPa

Partial Safety Factor for Concrete, γmc = 1.5
Partial Safety Factor for Steel, γms = 1.15
Yield Strength of Link Steel, fyv = 460 MPa
Yield Strength of Longitudinal Steel, fy = 460 MPa
Effective Depth of Section, d
Width of Section, b
Area of Tensile Steel Reinforcement Provided, As
Design shear force, V at d (BS 8110-Part 1:1997) or 2d (BS 5400-Part 4) from support.
Design shear stress, vs = V / bd. Design torsional stress for rectangular sections, vt = 2T / ((hmin2)(hmax-hmin/3)).
Torsional stress for thin hollow section, vt = T / (2Aht) where wall thickness of thin hollow section, ht and Area
enclosed by center-line of thin hollow section, A. Design torsional stress for T-, L- or I-shaped divided into
rectangular components and use T(hmin3.hmax)/ S(hmin3.hmax).
Ultimate shear stress capacity for shear and torsion. Check design shear and torsion stresses vs + vt < vu, lesser
of 0.8(fcu)0.5 or 5MPa whichever smaller (BS 8110-Part 1:1997). Check design shear and torsion stresses vs + vt <
vu, lesser of 0.75(fcu)0.5 or 4.75MPa whichever smaller (BS 5400-Part 4).
Shear capacity of concrete. Shear capacity of concrete, vc = (0.79/1.25)(100ρwfcu/25)1/3(400/d)1/4; 100ρw < 3; fcu <
40; (400/d)1/4 > 1.0 where tensile longitudinal steel ρw = As/bd (BS 8110-Part 1:1997). Nominal concrete shear
capacity, Vnominal = bd(vc) (BS 8110-Part 1:1997). Shear capacity of concrete, ξsvc =
(0.27/1.25)(100ρwfcu)1/3(500/d)1/4; 100ρw < 3; fcu < 40; (500/d)1/4 > 0.70 where tensile longitudinal steel ρw = As/bd
(BS 5400-Part 4). Nominal concrete shear capacity, Vnominal = bd(ξsvc) (BS 5400-Part 4).
Nominal shear links (if vs < 0.4 + vc) (BS 8110-Part 1:1997). Nominal shear links (if vs < ξsvc) (BS 5400-Part
4). Provide nominal shear links such that Asv/S > 0.4b/(fyv/γms) (BS 8110-Part 1:1997 and BS 5400-Part 4).
Nominal concrete and links shear capacity, Vnominal = bd (vc + 0.4) (BS 8110-Part 1:1997). Nominal concrete and
links shear capacity, Vnominal = bd (ξsvc + 0.4) (BS 5400-Part 4).
For non-concentrated loads within 2d of support, design shear links (if vs > 0.4 + vc) (BS 8110-Part 1:1997)
and design shear links (if vs > ξsvc) (BS 5400-Part 4). Provide stirrups such that Asv/S > b(vs-vc)/(fyv/γms) (BS
8110-Part 1:1997). Provide stirrups such that Asv/S > b(0.4+vs-ξsvc)/(fyv/γms) (BS 5400-Part 4). Provide
longitudinal tensile reinforcement for shear (in excess of that for bending) i.e. Asa > V/(2(fy/γms)) (BS 5400-Part 4).
For concentrated loads within 2d of support, enhanced shear capacity of concrete, vc,enhanced = 2dvc / av.
Provide stirrups such that avAsv/S > avb(vs-vc,enhanced)/(fyv/γms) (BS 8110-Part 1:1997). Provide stirrups such that
avAsv/S > avb(0.4+vs-ξsvc,enhanced)/(fyv/γms) (BS 5400-Part 4). Provide longitudinal tensile reinforcement for shear (in
excess of that for bending) i.e. Asa > V/(2(fy/γms)) (BS 5400-Part 4).
Design torsional links. Provide closed links such that Asv/S > T / (0.8x1y1(fyv/γms)) where horizontal dimension of
closed link, x1 and vertical dimension of closed link, y1. Provide longitudinal bars evenly distributed round inside
perimeter of links, As > (Asv/S)(fyv/fy)(x1+y1).
Design shear and torsional links. Provide combined shear and torsion closed links such that Asv/S > (Asv/S)shear
+ (Asv/S)torsion.
ULTIMATE LIMIT STATE DESIGN OF RECTANGULAR RC SECTION BS 8110-Part 1:1997 and BS5400-Part 4
1164
Second Edition
Concrete and Steel Material Stress-Strain Curve

Comments Units Reference
Characteristic Strength of Concrete fcu 50 MPa
Partial Safety Factor Steel, γms 1.15
Strength of shear link reinforcement steel, fyv 460 MPa
Longitudinal torsion reinforcement steel, fy 460 MPa
Section Dimensions
Effective Depth, d 484 mm
Width, b 1500 mm
Area of Tensile Steel Reinforcement Provided, As 7238 mm2
Ultimate Shear Force To Be Resisted, V @ face of support 600 kN
Design Shear Force To Be Resisted, V @ the critical section d (BS 8110) or 2d (BS 5400) 600 kN
Torsional Moment To Be Resisted, T 0 kNm
Design For Shear
A. Ultimate Shear Stress To Be Resisted @ face of support

Ultimate Shear Stress, vsupport = V / bd 0.83 MPa
Check ultimate shear stress vsupport < Ultimate shear vu, lesser of 0.8(fcu)0.5 or 5 whichever
smaller OKCheck MPa BS 8110
Check design shear stress vsupport < Ultimate shear vu, lesser of 0.75(fcu)0.5 or 4.75 whichever
smaller OKCheck MPa BS 5400
B. Design Shear Stress vs To Be Resisted @ the critical section d (BS 8110) or 2d (BS 5400)
Design Shear Stress, vs = V / bd 0.83 MPa
C. Concrete Capacity
100As/bd 1.00
Shear capacity of concrete, vc = (0.79/1.25)(100ρwfcu/25)1/3(400/d)1/4; 100ρw < 3; fcu < 40;
(400/d)1/4 > 0.67 0.70Insufficient MPa BS 8110
Shear capacity of concrete, vc = (0.79/1.25)(100ρwfcu/25)1/3(400/d)1/4; 100ρw < 3; fcu < 40;
1/4
(400/d) > 1.0 0.74Insufficient BS 8110
Shear capacity of concrete, ξsvc = (0.27/1.25)(100ρwfcu)1/3(500/d)1/4; 100ρw < 3; fcu < 40; (500/d)1/4
> 0.70 0.74Insufficient MPa BS 5400
D. Nominal Links (BS8110: if vs < 0.4 + vc and BS5400: if vs < ζvc)

BS 8110 &
Provide nominal links such that Asv / S > 0.4b/(fyv/γms) i.e. Asv / S > 1.50 mm2/mm BS 5400
Nominal concrete shear capacity, Vnominal = bd (vc) 511 kN BS 8110
Nominal concrete shear capacity, Vnominal = bd (ξsvc) 540 kN BS 5400
Nominal concrete and links shear capacity, Vnominal = bd (0.4+vc) 802 kN BS 8110
Nominal concrete and links shear capacity, Vnominal = bd (0.4+ξsvc) 831 kN BS 5400
E. Design shear reinforcement (BS8110: if vs > 0.4 + vc and BS5400: if vs > ζvc)
E (i) No concentrated load within 2d of support (Critical section d or 2d from face of support)
Provide stirrups such that Asv / S > b(vs-vc)/(fyv/γms) i.e. Asv / S > 0.46 mm2/mm BS 8110
Provide stirrups such that Asv / S > b(0.4+vs-ξcvc)/(fyv/γms) i.e. Asv / S > 1.81
2
mm /mm BS 5400
Provide longitudinal tensile reinforcement for shear (in excess of that for bending) i.e. Asa >
V/(2(fy/γms)) 750 mm
2
BS 5400
Provide longitudinal tensile reinforcement for shear (in excess of that for bending) i.e. Asa/b >
V/(2b(fy/γms)) 500 mm2/m BS 5400
Note that Asv is the cross sectional area of the stirrup * the number of stirrups
Try:-
Diameter of 1 shear link 12 mm
Number of links in a cross section, i.e. number of legs 5
1165
Second Edition
Area provided for shear resistance by all links in a cross-section, Asv 565 mm2
Spacing, S (ensuring <0.75d and >80mm) 300OK mm
Tried As / S value 1.88OK mm2/mm BS 8110
2
Tried As / S value 1.88OK mm /mm BS 5400
E (ii) Concentrated load within 2d of support, i.e. at av from support (Critical section av from
face of support)
av N/A mm
Enhanced shear capacity of concrete, vcenhanced = 2dvc / av #VALUE! MPa
Provide stirrups such that av Asv / S > av b(vs-vcenhanced)/(fyv/γms) i.e. av Asv / S > #VALUE! mm2 BS 8110
Provide stirrups such that avAsv / S > avb(0.4+vs-vcenhanced)/(fyv/γms) i.e. avAsv / S > #VALUE! mm
2
BS 5400
Provide longitudinal tensile reinforcement for shear (in excess of that for bending) i.e. Asa >
V/(2(fy/γms)) 750 mm 2
BS 5400
BS8110 requires this area of stirrups to be provided over the central three quarters of the shear
span, av
Design For Torsion
A. Maximum design torsion stress permissible
Larger Dimension of Rectangular Section, hmax 1800 mm

Smaller Dimension of Rectangular Section, hmin 850 mm
Design Torsional Stress for Rectangular Sections, vt = 2T / ((hmin2)(hmax-hmin/3)) 0.00 MPa
Wall thickness of thin hollow section, ht N/A mm

Area enclosed by centre-line of thin hollow section, A N/A mm2
Design Torsional Stress for Thin Hollow Section, vt = T / (2Aht) #VALUE! MPa
Design Torsional Stress for T-,L- or I-shaped divided into rectangular components and use T(hmin3 hmax)/
Σ(hmin3 hmax)
Design Torsional Stress, vt 0.93 MPa

Check design torsion stresses vt < vu, lesser of 0.8(fcu)0.5 or 5 whichever smaller OKCheck
B. Design torsion reinforcement

Horizontal dimension of closed link, x1 670 mm
Vertical dimension of closed link, y1 1605 mm
Provide closed links such that Asv / S > T / (0.8x1y1(fyv/γms)) i.e. Asv / S > 0.00 mm2/mm
Provide longitudinal bars evenly distributed round inside perimeter of links, As >
2
(Asv/S)(fyv/fy)(x1+y1) 0 mm
Design For Combined Shear and Torsion
Check design shear and torsion stresses vs + vt < vu, lesser of 0.8(fcu)0.5 or 5 whichever smaller 1.76OK MPa
2
Provide combined shear and torsion closed links such that Asv / S > 0.46 mm /mm
Try:-
Diameter of 1 shear link 16 mm
Number of links in a cross section, i.e. number of legs 4
Area provided for shear resistance by all links in a cross-section, Asv 804 mm2
Spacing, S (ensuring <0.75d and >80mm) 300OK mm
Tried As / S value 2.68OK mm2/mm
1166
Second Edition
8.4.2 Concepts of Moment Redistribution
1167
Second Edition
1168
Second Edition
1169
Second Edition
1170
Second Edition
1171
Second Edition
1172
Second Edition
1173
Second Edition
1174
Second Edition
1175
Second Edition
8.4.3 ULS Structural Floor Design – Reinforced Concrete
1176
Second Edition
8.4.4 ULS Structural Floor Design – Prestressed Concrete
In office buildings, large spans are required. Pre- and post-tensioned floors are useful to maintain acceptable
deflections without the need for expensive precambering.
In residential buildings, large spans are not required as the tenant sees the space already subdivided by walls,
which effectively hide the columns. Continuous spans can be achieved. However, unlike office buildings,
residential buildings as a rule do not have suspended ceilings – the ceiling may just be sprayed high-build coating
on the slab soffit or a plasterboard ceiling on battens fixed to the slab soffit. Flat-plate floors are therefore required
and deflection control is an important design consideration, both achieved by pre- or post-tensioned floors.
The major disadvantage of precast pre-tensioned floor beams or slabs is that the crainage required to lift the
heavy units along with the field-welded connections required for stability and diaphragm action. Post-tensioned
floors are usually more common for high-rise buildings.
8.4.4.1 (Precast) Pre-Tensioned
8.4.4.2 (Cast Insitu) Post-Tensioned Concrete Floor Systems
Common post-tensioned systems are

I. Post-tensioned flat slabs
II. Post-tensioned beams supporting post-tensioned slabs
III. Post-tensioned beams supporting RC slabs
1177
Second Edition
8.4.5 ULS Column Design – Bending, Axial, Shear and Torsion Effects
1178
Second Edition
8.4.6 ULS Wall Design
1179
Second Edition
8.4.7 ULS Connection Design
1180
Second Edition
8.4.8 ULS Fire Protection Design
1181
Second Edition
8.4.9 SLS Durability Design
1182
Second Edition
8.4.10 SLS Deflection Computation and Criteria
1183
Second Edition
1184
Second Edition
1185
Second Edition
1186
Second Edition
1187
Second Edition
1188
Second Edition
1189
Second Edition
1190
Second Edition
1191
Second Edition
1192
Second Edition
8.4.11 SLS Crack Width Calculations
1193
Second Edition
8.5 Prestressed Concrete Analysis and Design
1194
Second Edition
1195
Second Edition
1196
Second Edition
1197
Second Edition
1198
Second Edition
1199
Second Edition
1200
Second Edition
1201
Second Edition
1202
Second Edition
1203
Second Edition
1204
Second Edition
1205
Second Edition
1206
Second Edition
1207
Second Edition
1208
Second Edition
1209
Second Edition
1210
Second Edition
1211
Second Edition
1212
Second Edition
1213
Second Edition
1214
Second Edition
1215
Second Edition
1216
Second Edition
1217
Second Edition
1218
Second Edition
1219
Second Edition
1220
Second Edition
1221
Second Edition
1222
Second Edition
1223
Second Edition
1224
Second Edition
1225
Second Edition
1226
Second Edition
1227
Second Edition
1228
Second Edition
1229
Second Edition
1230
Second Edition
1231
Second Edition
1232
Second Edition
1233
Second Edition
1234
Second Edition
1235
Second Edition
1236
Second Edition
1237
Second Edition
1238
Second Edition
1239
Second Edition
1240
Second Edition
1241
Second Edition
1242
Second Edition
1243
Second Edition
8.6 Steel Design to BS 5950-Part 1:2000 (Buildings)
8.6.1 ULS Beam and Column Design – Bending (Incorporating High Shear Effects), Axial, Shear and
Buckling Effects
BS 5950-Part 1:2000 gives steel design strength based on thickness as follows. Note that the material partial safety
factor is 1.0.
Steel castings and forgings may be used for components in bearings, junctions and other similar parts. Castings
should conform to BS 3100 and forgings should conform to BS EN 10250-2. Unless better information is available,
design strengths corresponding to structural steel grade S 275 may be adopted.
To obtain the moment capacity (cl. 4.2.5), the following procedure is undertaken. The cross is classified to account
for plate buckling as described in Section 3.2.5.1.3. Note that additional considerations to moment capacity must
be made according to cl. 4.4.4.2 if web is subject to shear buckling as described in Section 3.2.5.1.4.
For low shear force, i.e. if Fv < 0.6Pv, then

Mc = pyS < 1.2Zpy for Class 1 plastic or Class 2 compact cross sections
pyZ for Class 3 semi-compact cross sections
pyZeff for Class 4 slender cross sections
For high shear force, i.e. if Fv > 0.6Pv, then

Mc = py(S-ρSv) < 1.2Zpy for Class 1 plastic or Class 2 compact cross sections
py(Z-ρSv/1.5) for Class 3 semi-compact cross sections
py(Zeff-ρSv/1.5) for Class 4 slender cross sections
in which Sv is
for sections with unequal flanges Sv = S – Sf where Sf is the plastic modulus of the effective section
excluding the shear area Av, or
for other sections Sv is the plastic modulus of the shear area Av
and ρ is given by [2(Fv/Pv) – 1]2.
1244
Second Edition
Alternatively, for symmetrical sections, the following simplified formula may be used for high shear force, i.e. if
Fv > 0.6Pv
where D is the total depth and t is the web thickness.
Clearly, a reduction in the moment capacity is incorporated to reduce the contribution of the web in
circumstances where it is highly stressed from the shear force.
Note that to avoid irreversible deformation under serviceability loads, the value of the moment capacity Mc should
be limited to 1.5pyZ generally and to 1.2pyZ in the case of a simply supported beam or a cantilever.
The moment capacity, Mc is calculated differently if the I-, H- or channel section is notched at its ends. The elastic
section modulus Z of the remaining unnotched section is used in the calculation and is described in cl. 4.2.5.4.
The section capacity (for Class 1, 2 or 3 sections) under moment and axial (tension or compression) forces must be
checked according to the following (cl. 4.8.2.2 or cl. 4.8.3.2)
F Mx My
Ensure utilisation = + + ≤1
Ap y S x p y S y p y
The shear force Fv should not be greater than the shear capacity Pv given by (cl. 4.2.3)
where the shear area of the web of an I- section, Av = tD, t the web thickness and D the overall depth of section. If
the section is a plate girder (i.e. welded), then the shear area is td where d is the web depth.
Elements are checked for Perry-Robertson buckling (Section 3.1.6.6.1), secant buckling (Section 3.1.6.6.2),
lateral-torsional buckling (Section 3.1.6.6.3) and a combination of buckling (Section 3.1.6.6.4).
1245
Second Edition
8.6.2 ULS Plate Girder Beam and Column Design – Bending (Incorporating High Shear Effects), Axial,
Shear and Buckling Effects
Plate girders are used when beams are required to resist forces and bending moments much higher than that which
can be resisted by standard rolled sections. A plastic design methodology is used. For best performance, the web
flange weld should be continuous and made by an automatic process. Intermittent welds give low fatigue strength.
Assuming a few section shape limitations (i.e. that the section is at least compact) are satisfied, a plate girder can be
conservatively designed almost in the same way as a normal rolled section (Section 8.6.1).
Span to depth ratio of (non-composite) simply-supported plate girders are 10 to 15 and (non-composite)
continuous plate girders are 15 to 20.
1246
Second Edition
8.6.3 ULS Structural Floor Design – Composite Steel and Reinforced Concrete
8.6.3.1 Floor Framing
Composite floor systems typically involve simply supported structural steel beams, girders or trusses linked via
shear connectors with a concrete floor slab to form an effective T-beam flexural member resisting primarily gravity
loads. The versatility of the system stems from the inherent strength of the concrete floor component in
compression and the tensile strength and spannability of the steel member. The slab and beam arrangement also
produces a rigid horizontal diaphragm, providing stability to the overall building system while distributing wind
and seismic shears to the lateral load resisting system elements.
Consideration must be given to the floor layout. Primary beams span between column or other predetermined
supports. Secondary beams are then required if floors are unable to span between primary beams. Below is shown
an inefficient and efficient flooring arrangements, i.e. the primary beams should span the shorter dimension whilst
the secondary beam spans the longer dimension to keep overall depths to a minimum. The spacing between the
secondary beams are governed by the span capability of the concrete floor, usually about 3m for no propping
during construction.
1247
Second Edition
8.6.3.2 Simple Steel I-Beam With Non-Composite or Composite Precast (Hollow) Slabs
These proprietary products can act compositely or not. If hollow, and to act compositely, then the effective width
may have to be reduced according to the manufacturer recommendations.
8.6.3.3 Prismatic Steel I-Beam Encased in T-section Reinforced Concrete, Flat Part of the T- Above the
Top Flange of I-Beam
This is an old solution before the advent of sprayed-on fire-proofing.
8.6.3.4 Prismatic Steel I-Beam Shear Studded Into Flat-Soffit Reinforced Concrete Slab
1248
Second Edition
8.6.3.5 Prismatic Steel I-Beam Shear Studded Into (Parallel Or Perpendicular Ribbed) Metal Deck With
Reinforced Concrete
1249
Second Edition
8.6.3.6 Prismatic Steel Plate Girder Shear Studded into Flat-Soffit Reinforced Concrete or (Parallel or
Perpendicular Ribbed) Metal Deck with Reinforced Concrete
Assuming a few section shape limitations and properties are satisfied (Section 8.6.2), a plate girder can be
conservatively designed almost in the same way as a normal rolled section, in which case the composite plate
girder with metal decking and reinforced concrete floor can also be designed as if the plate girder is a standard
rolled section (Section 8.6.3.5).
Span to depth ratio of simply-supported composite plate girders are 12 to 20.
8.6.3.7 Prismatic Steel I-Beam With Stub Girder And Reinforced Concrete Slab
1250
Second Edition
8.6.3.8 Prismatic Steel I-Beam With Web Openings, Castellated Beam, Cellular Beam or Westok Beam
Shear Studded into Flat-Soffit Reinforced Concrete or (Parallel or Perpendicular Ribbed) Metal
Deck with Reinforced Concrete
These have the advantage of increased spanability and stiffness due to the deeper structural depth and ease in
accommodating electrical conduits, plumbing pipes and hearing and air-conditioning ductwork. Openings in the
web can be up to 70% and can be rectangular or circular in shape.
At failure of beams with web openings, all the elements around the web are subject to high combined stresses
generated by axial forces from global bending, shear forces and also now additional local moments arising from the
Vierendeel action.
1251
Second Edition
Castellated sections are not very good for point loads. Span to depth must be < 20.
Even if the guidelines are followed, beams with web openings must still be checked for its capacity taking into
account the Vierendeel moments. Checks are based on web openings in composite and non-composite beams (SCI
Publications 068).
1252
Second Edition
1253
Second Edition
1254
Second Edition
1255
Second Edition
1256
Second Edition
1257
Second Edition
8.6.3.9 Prismatic Steel Warren (or Modified Warren) Truss or Pratt Truss, Both With or Without a
Vierendeel Panel in the Middle (for the Main Mechanical Duct) Shear Studded into Flat-Soffit
Reinforced Concrete or (Parallel or Perpendicular Ribbed) Metal Deck with Reinforced Concrete
These have the advantage of increased spanability and stiffness due to the deeper structural depth and ease in
accommodating electrical conduits, plumbing pipes and hearing and air-conditioning ductwork. Open web systems
however carry the premium for fire-proofing the many, relatively thin, components of the member.
8.6.3.10 Nonprismatic Tapered (Shallower at the Supports) Steel Plate Girder Shear Studded Into (Parallel
or Perpendicular Ribbed) Metal Deck with Reinforced Concrete
A prismatic composite steel beam has two fundamental disadvantages. Firstly, the simply-supported member
must be designed for maximum bending moment near the midspan and thus is often understressed near the
supports, and secondly building services ductwork and piping must pass beneath the beam or the beam must be
provided with web penetrations (normally reinforced with plates or angles leading to higher fabrication costs) to
allow access for equipment. As the non-prismatic tapered girder is completely fabricated from plate elements or
cut from rolled shapes, these composite members are frequently hybrid, with the top flange designed in lower
strength steel. However, a relatively wide and thick-gauge top flange must be provided for proper and effective
shear stud installation.
1258
Second Edition
8.6.4 ULS Composite Column Design
1259
Second Edition
8.6.5 ULS Connection Design
1260
Second Edition
8.6.6 ULS Bearing and Joints Design
1261
Second Edition
8.6.7 ULS Brittle Fracture Design
Brittle fracture is described in Section 6.3.28.2.2.
8.6.8 ULS Fatigue Design
Fatigue design is described in Section 5.5.
1262
Second Edition
Steel performs badly in fire. Temperatures reach 1200°C at the seat of the fire while the critical temperature for
steel is about 550°C, when the yield stress of steel has fallen to 0.7 of its value at ambient temperatures.
In general choose 1h fire protection for superstructure and 2h for ground floor and basement structure.
1263
Second Edition
1264
Second Edition
8.6.10 SLS Human Induced Vibration
Human footfall induced vibrations are described in Section 5.2.
1265
Second Edition
8.6.11 SLS Deflection Criteria
BS 5950-Part 1:2000 gives suggested limits for calculated static deflections for the live load serviceability limit
state (SLS). Note that only unfactored imposed (live) loads are required.
For multi-storey buildings a limit of storey height/500 may be more appropriate where the cladding cannot
accommodate greater movement.
1266
Second Edition
1267
Second Edition
8.6.12 SLS Corrosion Protection
Surface preparation is the most important single factor in achieving successful protection against corrosion. All
rolled steel are covered with a thin layer of iron oxide called mill scale which must be removed before corrosion
protection is applied as it will break off under flexure or abrasion and expose the steel to rusting. Surface
preparation can be performed by manual cleaning using scrapers, flame cleaning using a torch, pickling in a tank of
acid used as a preparation for galvanizing or blast cleaning where iron grit or sand is projected against the steel
surface. Protective coatings used are usually metal spraying (using zinc and aluminium coatings) and galvanizing
or paint systems.
Some general guidance for multi-storey steel buildings in non-polluted inland sites is presented.
Some common schemes are presented.
1268
Second Edition
1269
Second Edition
8.7 Steel Design to BS 5400-Part 3 (Bridges)
BS 5400-Part 3 is generally based upon elastic design methodology, unlike BS 5950-Part 1 which is based upon
the plastic design methodology.
1270
Second Edition
8.8 Timber Design to EC5
Conceptually, in EC5 and BS 5268, element design is based on elastic design and not plastic design. In EC5, the
ULS (i.e. factored) loads are used. This is unlike BS 5268 which is based on working (i.e. unfactored) loads. The
material properties i.e. Young’s Modulus, shear modulus, density and strength depends on the strength class. Note
that the shear modulus, G is not E/2/(1+ν) as the timber beams are orthotropic. Hence in the modelling of linear
elastic beam elements for structural analysis, E, G and ν must be explicitly input to model the orthotropic property.
Another significant point is that the design strength of timber varies for permanent, long-term, medium-term,
short-term and instantaneous loads due to the dependency of the design parameter kmod for loading of different
durations.
This means that the ULS combination of 1.35Dead + 1.35SDL + γpPrestress + 1.5Livei +1.5ψ0Liveother i must be
checked independently for the timber-specific time duration dependent loading. For instance, for the ULS factored
permanent structure self weight and ULS factored permanent partitions live loading combination, a value of kmod
of 0.6 (assuming service class 2) is used. Then, for the ULS factored structure self weight, ULS factored
permanent partitions live load and ULS factored short-term wind and ULS factored snow live loading
combination, a value of kmod of 0.9 (assuming service class 2) is used. Also, the structural analyses that are
performed to obtain the effects for these permanent and short-term cases are also necessarily based upon stiffness
values (Young’s modulus E and shear modulus G) which are different (to account for effects of creep and
moisture), the difference characterized by the parameter kdef.
These properties for permanent action and short term action are illustrated in the following example for the Centre
Pompidou, Metz.
A Permanent Action
A.1 Properties for Linear Structural Analysis

kdef,perm = 0.8
E = Emean / (1+kdef,perm) = 13.5GPa / 1.8 = 7.50GPa
G = Gmean / (1+kdef,perm) = 0.56GPa / 1.8 = 0.31GPa
A.2 ULS Loading and Simplified Combined Axial and Bending Stress Capacity Check
For permanent action, the load case is the factored permanent loads. Hence French combinations
1.35(DL) + 1.35(SDL)
The combined axial and bending stresses are checked against the design ultimate strength.
kmod,perm = 0.6
γm = 1.2
ft/c,0,d = (kmod,perm / γm)ft/c,0,k = (0.6/1.2) x 37MPa = 18.5MPa
The higher bending strength cannot be used unless the only effects are bending, i.e. no axial.
A.3 SLS Loading and Deflection Check

For permanent action, the load case is the unfactored permanent loads. Hence French combinations
1.0(DL) + 1.0(SDL)
These deflections are checked against acceptable deflection criteria.
1271
Second Edition
B Short Term Action
B.1 Properties for Linear Structural Analysis

kdef,st = 0.0
ψ2,st = 0.2
E = Emean / (1+ψ2,stkdef,st) = 13.5GPa / 1.0 = 13.5GPa
G = Gmean / (1+ψ2,stkdef,st) = 0.56GPa / 1.0 = 0.56GPa
B.2 ULS Loading and Simplified Combined Axial and Bending Stress Capacity Check
For short term action, the load case is the factored short term loads. Hence French combinations
1.35(DL) + 1.35(SDL) + 1.5(Wind)
1.35(DL) + 1.35(SDL) + 1.5(Snow)
1.35(DL) + 1.35(SDL) + 1.35(Wind) + 1.35(Snow)
The combined axial and bending stresses are checked against the design ultimate strength.
kmod,st = 0.9
γm = 1.2
ft/c,0,d = (kmod,st / γm)ft/c,0,k = (0.9/1.2) x 37MPa = 27.75MPa
The higher bending strength cannot be used unless the only effects are bending, i.e. no axial.
B.3 SLS Loading and Deflection Check

For short term action, the load case is the unfactored short term loads. The result from the
permanent load action (which is based on different creep dependent stiffness values) is added to the
short term loads. Hence French combinations
Results A.3 + 1.0(Wind)
Results A.3 + 1.0(Snow)
Results A.3 + 1.0(Wind) + 1.0(Snow)
These deflections are checked against acceptable deflection criteria.
1272
Second Edition
8.8.1 ULS Beam and Column Design
1273
Second Edition
8.8.2 ULS Dowel (Nailed, Screwed, Bolted, Doweled) Connection Design
Generally there are 4 types of connections in timber, namely direct bearing (most efficient), glued joints (scarf
joints, finger joints, and occasionally glued in fin-plates), dowels (including nails, screws, bolts, dowels) and timber
connectors (split rings, shear plates and toothed connectors).
1274
Second Edition
The rate of charring is about 0.6mm/minute and so to provide 30 minutes fire protection, a member would need to
be 20mm larger on all exposed faces.
1275
Second Edition
8.9 Masonry Design to BS 5628
Typical material properties are presented.
Fire protection requirements are presented.
1276
Second Edition
9 GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING
9.1 Basic Soil Mechanics
1277
Second Edition
1278
Second Edition
1279
Second Edition
1280
Second Edition
1281
Second Edition
1282
Second Edition
1283
Second Edition
9.2 Slope Stability Analysis
1284
Second Edition
1285
Second Edition
1286
Second Edition
1287
Second Edition
9.3 Earth Pressure Analysis and Retaining Wall Design
1288
Second Edition
1289
Second Edition
1290
Second Edition
1291
Second Edition
1292
Second Edition
1293
Second Edition
1294
Second Edition
1295
Second Edition
1296
Second Edition
1297
Second Edition
1298
Second Edition
1299
Second Edition
1300
Second Edition
1301
Second Edition
1302
Second Edition
1303
Second Edition
1304
Second Edition
1305
Second Edition
1306
Second Edition
1307
Second Edition
1308
Second Edition
1309
Second Edition
1310
Second Edition
1311
Second Edition
9.4 Foundation Design
9.4.1 Scheme Design
1312
Second Edition
1313
Second Edition
1314
Second Edition
1315
Second Edition
9.4.2 Allowable Bearing Pressure
1316
Second Edition
1317
Second Edition
9.4.3 Pad Footing
Pad footings are used under individual columns.
1318
Second Edition
1319
Second Edition
1320
Second Edition
1321
Second Edition
1322
Second Edition
1323
Second Edition
1324
Second Edition
1325
Second Edition
1326
Second Edition
1327
Second Edition
1328
Second Edition
9.4.4 Strip Footing
Strip footings are used under walls or a row of columns.
1329
Second Edition
9.4.5 Raft Foundation
Raft foundations are large slabs which support the complete building.
1330
Second Edition
9.4.6 Basement Foundation
Basements can be of one or more stories and form an underground extension to the building that often serves as a
carpark.
1331
Second Edition
1332
Second Edition
1333
Second Edition
1334
Second Edition
1335
Second Edition
9.4.7 Piled Foundation
Piled foundations can be used in combination with other foundations types which function as the pile cap.
1336
Second Edition
1337
Second Edition
1338
Second Edition
1339
Second Edition
Approximate pile design for London clay is presented.
1340
Second Edition
9.5 Settlement Analysis
1341
Second Edition
1342
Second Edition
1343
Second Edition
1344
Second Edition
1345
Second Edition
1346
Second Edition
1347
Second Edition
10 CONVERSION FACTORS
1348
Second Edition
BIBLIOGRAPHY
Structural Analysis and Mechanics of Materials
1. BALFOUR, James A.D. Computer Analysis of Structural Frameworks 2nd Edition. Blackwell Scientific
Publications, Oxford, 1992.
2. BHATT, P. Structures. Longman, England, 1999.
3. GAY, Daniel, HOA, Suong, TSAI, Stephen. Composite Materials Design and Application. CRC Press,
London, 2003.
4. CIDECT. Design Guide For Rectangular Hollow Sections (RHS) Joints Under Predominantly Static
Loading. Rheinland, Germany, 1992.
5. TIMOSHENKO & GERE. Mechanics of Materials 4th SI Edition. Stanley Thornes, United Kingdom, 1991.
6. BUDYNAS, Richard. Advanced Strength and Applied Stress Analysis Second Edition. McGraw-Hill
International, Singapore, 1999.
7. ROARK, R.J. and YOUNG, W.C. Roark’s Formulas for Stress and Strain 7th Edition. McGraw-Hill,
London.
8. MCEVILY, Arthur, J. Metal Failures, Mechanisms, Analysis, Prevention. John Wiley & Sons, New York,
2002.
9. LEVY, Matthys and SALVADORI, Mario. Why Buildings Fall Down. W.W. Norton & Company Ltd.,
United States of America, 1992.
10. CONCRETE SOCIETY. Design Guidance for Strengthening Concrete Structures Using Fibre Composite
Materials. Technical Report 55, The Concrete Society, United Kingdom, 2000.
Finite Element Theory
11. ZIENKIEWICZ, O.C. & TAYLOR, R.L. The Finite Element Method. The Basis. Volume 1. 5th Edition.
Butterworth-Heinemann, Oxford, 2000.
12. COOK, Robert; MALKUS, David; PLESHA, Michael; WITT, Robert; Concepts & Applications of Finite
Element Analysis Fourth Edition. John Wiley & Sons, Inc, United States of America, 2002.
13. FELIPPA, Carlos A. Introduction to Finite Element Methods. Center for Aerospace Structures, University of
Colorado, 2001.
14. FELIPPA, Carlos A. Advanced Finite Element Methods. Center for Aerospace Structures, University of
Colorado, 2001.
15. FELIPPA, Carlos A. Nonlinear Finite Element Methods. Center for Aerospace Structures, University of
Colorado, 2001.
Finite Element Modelling
16. NAFEMS. A Finite Element Primer. NAFEMS Ltd., Great Britain, 1992.
17. ADAMS, Vince. Building Better Products With Finite Element Analysis. High Mountain Press, 1999.
18. SPYRAKOS, Constantine. Finite Element Modelling In Engineering Practice. West Virginia University
Press, United States of America, 1994.
19. HITCHINGS, Dennis. A Finite Element Dynamics Primer. NAFEMS Ltd., Great Britain, September 1991.
Dynamics
20. HARTOG, Den J.P. Mechanical Vibrations 4th Edition. McGraw-Hill Book Co., New York, 1934.
21. PAZ, Mario. Structural Dynamics Theory and Computation. Chapman and Hall, New York, 1997.
22. SPENCE, Dr. Peter. What is ‘Power Spectral Density’. The Analyst.
23. WHITTAKER, Andrew. Introduction to Earthquake Engineering Lecture Notes. University of Buffalo,
2001.
1349
Second Edition
24. SADEK, Fahim et al. A Method Of Estimating The Parameters of Tuned Mass Dampers For Seismic
Applications. John Wiley & Sons Ltd., Earthquake Engineering and Structural Dynamics, Vol 26, 617-635,
1997.
25. CONNOR, Jerome. Introduction to Structural Motion Control. Prentice Hall, Massachusetts Institute of
Technology, 2003.
26. BACHMANN, Hugo. Vibration Problems in Structures Practical Guidelines. Birkhauser, Berlin, 1995.
27. DESIGN MANUAL FOR ROADS AND BRIDGES. Design Rules for Aerodynamic Effects on Roads and
Bridges BD 49/01. Highways Agency, UK.
28. TRL Limited. Background to the Development of BD 49/01: Design Rules for Aerodynamic Effects on Roads
and Bridges BD 49/01. TRL Report 528, TRL Limited, United Kingdom, 2002.
29. EWINS, D.J. Modal Testing Theory, Practice and Application Second Edition. Research Studies Press Ltd,
England, 2000.
30. JIMIN, He and ZHI-FANG, Fu. Modal Analysis. Butterworth-Heinemann, Great Britain, 2001.
31. BRUEL & KJAER. Vibration Analysis, Measurement and Testing. Denmark, 2001.
32. CLOUGH R.W. & PENZIEN J. Dynamics of Structures 2nd Edition. McGraw-Hill Book Co., United States,
1993.
33. SMITH, J.W. Vibration of Structures, Application in Civil Engineering Design. Chapman and Hall, London,
1988.
34. BEARDS, C. F. Structural Vibration Analysis, Modelling, Analysis and Damping in Vibrating Structures.
Ellis Horwood, London, 1983.
35. SELVAM, Dr. R.P & GOVINDASWAMY, Suresh. Aeroelastic Analysis of Bridge Girder Section Using
Computer Modelling. University of Arkansas, May 2001.
36. SIMIU and SCALAN. Wind Effects on Structures, An Introduction to Wind Engineering.
Imperial College of Science, Technology and Medicine, London
37. Dr IZZUDDIN, Bassam. Non-Linear Structural Mechanics. Imperial College of Science Technology and
Medicine, London, 2000.
38. Dr IZZUDDIN, Bassam. Computational Engineering Analysis MEng Lectures. Imperial College of Science
Technology and Medicine, London, 1999.
39. Dr WADEE, M. Structural Stability Systems Lecture Notes. Imperial College of Science Technology and
40. Dr LLYOD, Smith. Plastic Collapse Analysis Lectures. Imperial College of Science Technology and
41. Dr LLYOD, Smith. Aerodynamic Forces on Structures. Imperial College of Science Technology and
42. Prof HOBBS. Virtual Work, Flexibility, Direct Stiffness Method, and Moment Distribution Method Lectures.
Imperial College of Science Technology and Medicine, London, 1999.
43. Dr BOMMER, Earthquake Engineering Seismicity Lectures. Imperial College of Science Technology and
44. Dr SARMA, Earthquake Engineering Soil Effects Lectures. Imperial College of Science Technology and
45. Prof ELNASHAI, Earthquake Engineering Seismic Analysis Lectures. Imperial College of Science
46. Dr PINHO. Earthquake Engineering RC Detailing Lectures. Imperial College of Science Technology and
47. Dr SWAN. Wave Mechanics and Wave Loading Lectures. Imperial College of Science Technology and
48. Dr RAMACHANDRAN, K. Structural Dynamics College Lectures. Imperial College of Science Technology
and Medicine, London, 2001.
49. Dr Hardwick, J.D. Fluid Mechanics Lectures. Imperial College of Science Technology and Medicine,
London, 1997-1998.
1350
Second Edition
50. Prof WYATT, Tom. Steel Design MEng 4th Year. Imperial College of Science Technology and Medicine,
London, 2001.
51. Dr ELGHAZOULI. Steel Design. Imperial College of Science Technology and Medicine, London, 1999.
52. Dr IZZUDDIN, Bassam. Computational Engineering Analysis MSC Lectures. Imperial College of Science
MacNeal-Schwendler Corporation
53. SITTON, Grant. MSC.NASTRAN Basic Dynamic Analysis User’s Guide. The MacNeal-Schwendler
Corporation, Los Angeles, U.S.A, July 1997.
54. MOORE, Gregory J. MSC.NASTRAN Design Sensitivity and Optimization User’s Guide. The MacNeal-
Schwendler Corporation, U.S.A, 1995.
55. KOMZSIK, Louis. MSC.NASTRAN Numerical Methods User’s Guide. The MacNeal-Schwendler
Corporation, U.S.A, 1998.
56. MILLER, Mark. Getting Started With MSC.NASTRAN User’s Guide. 2nd Edition. The MacNeal-Schwendler
57. MACNEAL-SCHWENDLER CORP. MSC.NASTRAN Practical Dynamic Analysis Seminar Notes.
58. BISHOP, Dr. Neil. Fundamentals of FEA Based Fatigue Analysis & Vibration Fatigue in MSC.FATIGUE
and MSC.NASTRAN Seminar Notes 2002. MacNeal-Schwendler Corp., England, 2002.
59. LEE, John. MSC.NASTRAN Linear Static Analysis User’s Guide Version 69. The MacNeal-Schwendler
Corporation, U.S.A, May 1997.
60. MATINEZ, Angel. Submodelling Techniques for Static Analysis. MSC. Software First South European
Technology Conference, 7-9 June 2000.
61. LEE, John M. MSC.NASTRAN Common Questions and Answers. 3rd Edition. The MacNeal-Schwendler
62. DICKENS, J, NAKAGAWA, J, WITTBRODT. A Critique of Mode Acceleration And Modal Truncation
Augmentation Methods For Modal Response Analysis. Elsevier Science Ltd., Computers and Structures
Volume 62, No. 6, 1997.
63. MACNEAL-SCHWENDLER CORP. MSC.NASTRAN Nonlinear Analysis Seminar Notes. MacNeal-
Schwendler Corp., Los Angeles, May 1994.
64. MACNEAL-SCHWENDLER CORP. MSC.NASTRAN Reference Manual 2001. MacNeal-Schwendler Corp.,
Los Angeles, 2001.
65. MACNEAL-SCHWENDLER CORP. MSC.NASTRAN Release Guide 70.7. The MacNeal-Schwendler
Corporation, U.S.A.
66. MACNEAL-SCHWENDLER CORP. MSC.NASTRAN Release Guide 2001. The MacNeal-Schwendler
67. MACNEAL-SCHWENDLER CORP. MSC.NASTRAN Release Guide 2004. The MacNeal-Schwendler
68. HERTING, David. MSC.NASTRAN Advanced Dynamic Analysis User’s Guide. The MacNeal-Schwendler
69. MACNEAL-SCHWENDLER CORP. MSC.NASTRAN Practical Finite Element Modelling Techniques
Seminar Notes.
70. BELLINGER, Dean. Dynamic Analysis by the Fourier Transform Method with MSC.NASTRAN. MacNeal-
Schwendler Corp., Los Angeles, 1995.
71. MACNEAL-SCHWENDLER CORP. MSC.NASTRAN Fatigue Analysis Quick Start Guide 2001. MacNeal-
72. MACNEAL-SCHWENDLER CORP. MSC.NASTRAN Fatigue Analysis User Guide 2001. MacNeal-
73. MACNEAL-SCHWENDLER CORP. MSC.NASTRAN Aeroelastic Analysis User Guide 2001. MacNeal-
74. MACNEAL-SCHWENDLER CORP. MSC.NASTRAN Superelement User’s Guide 2001. The MacNeal-
Schwendler Corporation, U.S.A, 2001.
1351
Second Edition
75. MACNEAL-SCHWENDLER CORP. MSC 1995 World User’s Conference Proceedings. MacNeal-
Livermore Software Technology Corporation
76. LIVERMORE SOFTWARE TECHNOLOGY CORPORATION. LS-DYNA Keyword User’s Manual Version
950. Livermore Software Technology Corporation, California, U.S.A, May 1999.
77. LIVERMORE SOFTWARE TECHNOLOGY CORPORATION. LS-DYNA Theoretical Manual Version
950. Livermore Software Technology Corporation, California, U.S.A, May 1999.
Ove Arup & Partners International Ltd
78. IZATT, Conrad. Dynamic Relaxation in LS-DYNA. Advanced Technology Ove Arup & Partners
International Ltd., London.
79. HARGREAVES, James. Modal Analysis, Forced Response And Optimization In MSC.NASTRAN For
Vehicle NVH Applications. Advanced Technology Ove Arup & Partners International Ltd., Coventry, 1998.
80. HARGREAVES, James. Introduction to MSC.NASTRAN Training for ATG Graduates. Advanced
Technology Ove Arup & Partners International Ltd., Coventry.
81. OVE ARUP & PARTNERS INTERNATIONAL LTD. Structural Modelling Manual. Ove Arup & Partners
International Ltd., London, 2002.
82. DALLARD, PAT. Buckling – An Approach Based on Geometric Stiffness and Eigen Analysis. Ove Arup &
Partners International Ltd., London, June 1998.
83. MCKECHNIE, Steve. Buckling Analysis Using the Dallard Method in GSA. Ove Arup & Partners
84. WILLFORD, Michael & YOUNG, Peter. Towards A Consistent Approach of Predicting Footfall-Induced
Structural Vibrations. Advanced Technology Ove Arup & Partners International Ltd., London.
85. FELTHAM, Ian. Berlin Floor Vibration Seminar 2003. Ove Arup and Partners International Ltd., London,
2003.
86. WILFORD, Michael. An Investigation into Crowd-Induced Vertical Dynamic Loads Using Available
Measurements. Ove Arup and Partners International Ltd., 2003.
87. OVE ARUP & PARTNERS INTERNATIONAL LTD. Engineering for Structural Vibrations, Current
Developments in Research and Practice. Ove Arup & Partners International Ltd., London, October 2001.
88. OVE ARUP & PARTNERS INTERNATIONAL LTD. Dynamics and Buckling in GSA. Ove Arup &
Partners International Ltd., London, 1999.
89. DALLARD, FITZPATRICK, FLINT, LE BOURVA, LOW, RIDSDILL SMITH, WILLFORD. The London
Millennium Footbridge. The Structural Engineer Journal Volume 79 / No. 22, Institution of Structural
Engineers, London, November 2001.
90. FELTHAM, Ian. Calculating the Shear Stiffness of Trusses and Frames. Structures Notes 2003NST_5b, Ove
Arup & Partners Ltd., London, 2003.
91. OVE ARUP & PARTNERS INTERNATIONAL LTD. Constrained Layer Bithuthene Damping Analysis
with MSC.NASTRAN. Advanced Technology Group, London, 2000.
92. POWELL, Daniel. Tuned Slosh Dampers. Arup Research and Development, Ove Arup & Partners Ltd.,
London, 2003.
93. OVE ARUP & PARTNERS INTERNATIONAL LTD. Nonlinear Analysis and Form-finding in GSA. Ove
Arup & Partners International Ltd., London, December 2002.
94. BANFI, Mike and FELTHAM, Ian. Stability of Structures. Ove Arup and Partners International Ltd.,
London, 2003.
95. BANFI, Mike and FELTHAM, Ian. Preparing for the IStructE Part III Examinations. Ove Arup and Partners
96. OVE ARUP & PARTNERS LTD. An Arup Introduction to Structural Dynamics. Ove Arup & Partners
International Ltd., London.
Structural Engineering
1352
Second Edition
97. INSTITUTION OF STRUCTURAL ENGINEERS. Stability of Buildings. Institution of Structural Engineers,

London, 1998.
98. OVE ARUP & PARTNERS INTERNATIONAL LTD. Scheme Design Guide. Ove Arup & Partners
99. GOODCHILD, C.H. Economic Concete Frame Elements. Reinforced Concrete Council, Great Britain, 1997.
100. TRADA. Eurocode 5 1995 Design Examples J – Joints. Timber Research and Development Association,
United Kingdom, 1994.
101. BRITISH STANDARDS INSTITUTION. Structural Use of Timber Part 3 Code of Practice for Trussed
Rafter Roofs BS 5268-3: 1998. BSI, London.
102. TRADA. Trussed Rafters. Timber Research and Development Association, United Kingdom, July 1991.
103. TRADA. Bracing for Non-Domestic Timber Trussed Rafter Roofs. Timber Research and Development
Association, United Kingdom, 1999.
104. INSTITUTION OF STRUCTURAL ENGINEERS. IStructE Part III Exam CD. Institution of Structural
Engineers, London.
105. STEEL CONSTRUCTION INSTITUTE. Steel Designers’ Manual 5th and 6th Editions. Blackwell Science,
London, 1994, 2003.
106. BRITISH STANDARDS INSTITUTION. Steel Codes of Practice BS 5950-Part 1:2000. BSI, London.
107. BRITISH STANDARDS INSTITUTION. Loading For Buildings BS 6399-1, BS 6399-2, BS 6399-3. BSI,
London, 1996.
108. BRITISH STANDARDS INSTITUTION. Concrete Codes of Practice BS 8110-Part 1:1997. BSI, London.
109. BRITISH STANDARDS INSTITUTION. Steel Bridge Codes of Practice BS 5400-Part 3. BSI, London.
110. BRITISH STANDARDS INSTITUTION. Concrete Bridge Codes of Practice BS 5400-Part 4. BSI, London.
111. BRITISH STANDARDS INSTITUTION. Fatigue Resistant Design of Bridges. BS 5400-Part 10. BSI,
London.
112. BRITISH STANDARDS INSTITUTION. Fatigue Design and Assessment of Steel Structures BS 7608:1993.
BSI, London.
113. BRITISH STANDARDS INSTITUTION. Masonry Codes of Practice BS 5628. BSI, London.
114. BRITISH STANDARDS INSTITUTION. Timber Codes of Practice BS 5268. BSI, London.
115. EUROCODE 8. Design Provisions for the Earthquake Resistance of Structures. European Committee for
Standardization, Brussels, 1998.
116. FEMA 356. Prestandard and Commentary for the Seismic Rehabilitation of Buildings. American Society of
Civil Engineers.
117. TRAHAIR. The Behaviour and Design of Steel Structures to BS 5950.
118. BIRKHAUSER. Steel Construction Manual.
119. MACGINLEY. Steel Structures Practical Design Studies.
120. DENNIS LAM. Structural Steelwork Third Edition.
121. TREVOR DRAYCOTT. Structural Element Design Manual. Great Britain, 1990.
122. STEEL CONSTRUCTION INSTITUTE. Steelwork Design Guide to BS5950. Great Britain.
123. STEEL CONSTRUCTION INSTITUTE. Handbook of Structural Steelwork. Great Britain.
124. INSTITUTION OF STRUCTURAL ENGINEERS. Manual For The Design Of Steelwork Building
Structures To BS 5950. Great Britain.
125. INSTITUTION OF STRUCTURAL ENGINEERS. Manual For The Design Of Steelwork Building
Structures To EC3. Great Britain.
126. STEEL CONSTRUCTION INSTITUTE. Portal Frame Design in Europe Part 1 and Part 2. Great Britain.
127. STEEL CONSTRUCTION INSTITUTE. Design of Structural Steelwork Lattice Framed Industrial
Steelwork. Great Britain.
128. SIRIA. Technical Note 068 Design for Web Openings. Great Britain.
129. STEEL CONSTRUCTION INSTITUTE. Simple Connections. Great Britain.
130. STEEL CONSTRUCTION INSTITUTE. Moment Connections. Great Britain.
131. STEEL CONSTRUCTION INSTITUTE. Composite Connections. Great Britain.
132. STEEL CONSTRUCTION INSTITUTE. Steel Detailers Manual 2nd Edition. Great Britain.
133. STEEL CONSTRUCTION INSTITUTE. Wind Moment Design Of Low Rise Frames. Great Britain.
1353
Second Edition
134. STEEL CONSTRUCTION INSTITUTE. Wind Moment Design Of Unbraced Composite Frames. Great
Britain.
135. BRE, SCI AND OVE ARUP. Worked Examples for the Design of Steel Structures. Great Britain.
136. BRE. Wind Digest 436 Part 1, Part 2 and Part 3. Great Britain.
137. MOSLEY. Reinforced Concrete Design Fifth Edition. Great Britain, 1999.
138. CHUDLEY. Construction Technology. Great Britain.
139. CHUDLEY. Advanced Construction Technology. Great Britain.
140. Birkhauser. Concrete Construction Manual.
141. EUGENE J. O’BRIEN. Reinforced and Prestressed Concrete Design. Great Britain.
142. ROBIN WHITTLE. Arup Reinforced Concrete Detailing Manual. Ove Arup, Great Britain.
143. CIRIA. Design and Construction of Joints in Concrete Structures. Great Britain.
144. INSTITUTION OF STRUCTURAL ENGINEERS. Design Recommendations for Multi-storey and
Underground Car Parks. Great Britain, June 2002.
145. INSTITUTION OF STRUCTURAL ENGINEERS. Manual For The Design Of Reinforced Concrete
Building Structures To BS 8110 2nd Edition. Great Britain.
146. INSTITUTION OF STRUCTURAL ENGINEERS. Manual For The Design Of Reinforced Concrete
Building Structures To Eurocode 2. Great Britain.
147. INSTITUTION OF STRUCTURAL ENGINEERS. Standard Method of Detailing Structural Concrete. Great
Britain, August 1999.
148. CIRIA. The Design of Deep Beams in Reinforced Concrete Guide. Ove Arup and Partners. Great Britain.
149. BCA and OVE ARUP. Worked Examples for the Design of Concrete Buildings EC2. Great Britain, 1994.
150. BIRKHAUSER. Timber Construction Manual.
151. CHING. Building Construction Illustrated.
152. STEP. Timber Engineering Step Lectures.Netherlands.
153. CHUDLEY and GREENO. Building Construction Handbook Fourth Edition. Great Britain, 2002.
154. OZELTON. Timber Designers Manual Third Edition.Great Britain.
155. TRADA. Timber Frame Construction (2001). Great Britain, 2001.
156. INSTITUTION OF STRUCTURAL ENGINEERS. Design of Plain Masonry in Building Structures. Great
Britain.
157. CURTIN. Reinforced Masonry Designers Manual. Blackwell Science, Great Britain, 1995.
158. TOMLINSON. Foundation Design and Construction.Great Britain.
159. SUTTON. Solving Problems in Soil Mechanics. Great Britain.
160. CURTIN. Structural Foundation Designers Manual. Blackwell Science, Great Britain.
161. BCA. Design of Basement with Waterproofing.Great Britain.
162. COUNCIL ON TALL BUILDINGS AND URBAN HABITAT. Structural Systems For Tall Buildings.
McGraw-Hill International, Singapore, 1995.
163. COUNCIL ON TALL BUILDINGS AND URBAN HABITAT. Tall Buildings: 2000 and Beyond.
164. BUNGALE S. TARANATH. Steel, Concrete, and Composite Design of Tall Buildings Second Edition.
McGraw-Hill, United States of America, 1998.
165. MICHAEL CHEW YIT LIN. Construction Technology for Tall Buildings.
166. WOLFGANG SCHUELLER. Vertical Building Structure. New York, 1990.
167. STAFFORD-SMITH. Tall Building Structures: Analysis and Design.
1354

Structural Engineering Analysi

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Structural Engineering Analysi

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

_________________________________________________________

ENGR SREEJIT RAGHU

Ove Arup & Partners International Ltd

tel +44 (0) 20 7636 1531

LIST OF SYMBOLS AND NOTATIONS .............................................................................................................14

2 CONCEPTS OF COMPUTATIONAL FINITE ELEMENT STRUCTURAL ANALYSIS.......................18

2.1 OVERVIEW OF THE FINITE ELEMENT METHOD ............................................................................................18

3 METHODS OF STATIC ANALYSES.............................................................................................................42

4 METHODS OF DYNAMIC ANALYSES......................................................................................................288

4.1 GL, ML IMPLICIT REAL MODAL (EIGENVALUE) ANALYSIS ......................................................................288

5 ADVANCED APPLICATIONS OF METHODS OF STATIC AND DYNAMIC ANALYSES ...............510

5.1 EARTHQUAKE INDUCED VIBRATIONS ..........................................................................................................510

5.1.1.11 Estimation of Focal Depth .................................................................................................................................................................................. 513

5.8.1 Introduction ..................................................................................................................................................................................876

6 FINITE ELEMENT MODELLING TECHNIQUES AND MSC.NASTRAN CARDS COMMON TO

6.1 INPUT DECK .DAT FORMAT ...........................................................................................................................892

6.3.21.2 MPC Constraint Method ..................................................................................................................................................................................... 945

7 LS-DYNA CARDS .........................................................................................................................................1038

7.1 KEYWORD FORMAT OF INPUT DECK .........................................................................................................1038

8 STRUCTURAL ENGINEERING ................................................................................................................1058

8.1 CONCEPTUAL STRUCTURAL DESIGN ..........................................................................................................1058

9.1 BASIC SOIL MECHANICS .............................................................................................................................1277

Engr Sreejit Raghu

LIST OF SYMBOLS AND NOTATIONS

{y} = displacement function

SDOF, MDOF and Modal Dynamic Equation of Motion Notations

SDOF Dynamic Notations

ωn = Natural circular frequency, (k/m)1/2

SDOF Free Vibrational Notations

G = Complex starting transient response function, G = GR + iGI

P(t) = Loading function

Dmax = Maximum dynamic amplification factor

Modal Time Domain Loading and Transient and Steady-State Notations

{P(t)} = Loading function vector

SDOF Frequency Domain Loading and Steady-State Response Notations

Modal Frequency Domain Loading and Steady-State Response Notations

ML: Materially Linear

2 CONCEPTS OF COMPUTATIONAL FINITE ELEMENT STRUCTURAL ANALYSIS

2.1.1 GL, ML Static Finite Element Elemental Formulation

{σ} = [DA][BA]{d} + {σ}i − [DA]{ε}i

δ{d} {f } + ∫ δ{y} {b}dΩ = ∫ δ{ε} {σ}dΩ

{y} = [ N ]{d} hence {y}T = {d}T [ N ]T

δ{d} {f } + ∫ δ{d} [ N] {b}dΩ = ∫ δ{d}T [ B A ] T {σ}i dΩ − δ{d}T [ B A ] T [ D A ]{ε}i dΩ

(i) the elemental instantaneous stiffness matrix

2.1.1.2 The Method of Weighted Residuals

∫ v(Differential Equation )dΩ + v(Natural Boundary Conditions of the Differential Equation) = 0

2.1.2 GL, ML Static Finite Element Global Formulation

[ ] {∫ [B ] {σ} dΩ}− {∫ [B ] [D ]{ε} dΩ}− {∫ [N] {b}dΩ}

δW = δ{d} {f } (for all δ{U})

Total Potential Energy, V = U + (− W)

For equilibrium,  =  {f } −  ∂W  = {0}

Both theorems result in the nodal equilibrium equations

= [T ] [k ][T ]{U} + [T ] {∫ [B ] {σ} dΩ}− [T ] {∫ [B ] [D ]{ε} dΩ}− [T ] {∫ [ N] {b} dΩ}

= [K ]{U} + [T ] {∫ [B ] {σ} dΩ}− [T ] {∫ [B ] [D ]{ε} dΩ}− [T ] {∫ [ N] {b} dΩ}

Finally, element stress recovery is performed utilizing

{σ} = [DA][BA]{d} + {σ}i − [DA]{ε}i

2.1.3 GNL, MNL Static Finite Element Elemental Formulation

{σ} = [D][B]{d} + {σ}i − [D]{ε}i

∫ δ{ε} {σ}dΩ − δ{d} {f } − ∫ δ{y} {b}dΩ = 0

δ{d} {f } + ∫ δ{d} [ N] {b}dΩ = ∫ δ{d}T [ B] T {σ}i dΩ − δ{d}T [ B] T [ D]{ε}i dΩ

(i) the elemental instantaneous stiffness matrix

{f} = [kE]{d} + Fixed End Forces

Hence, we can conclude that the elemental tangent stiffness matrix is

Elements with MNL capabilities have the following additional capabilities: -