P-Delta Analysis in Staad

The P-Delta effect is one of the primary parameter that every structural designer would not want to
ignore accounting for while performing the stability analysis and design of slender member, tall
structure or any structure that experiences significant gravity loads in addition to the lateral force.

This is a second order analysis induced by the geometric non linearity which accounts for both the P-
Large delta ( P-Δ) and P-small delta (P-δ) effect. No practical column is ideally straight and vertical
and hence the effect of the initial imperfections, out of plumbness must be accounted for in the stability
analysis. So it is suggested to take the P-Δ and P-δ effect while performing the analysis.

In the conventional first order structural analysis, the equilibrium is expressed in terms of the geometry
of the un-deformed structure. In case of the linearly elastic structure, relation between displacement and
external force is proportional and hence the unknown deformations can be obtained in a simple and
direct manner, whereas second-order analysis requires an iterative procedure to obtain the solutions.
This is because the deformed geometry of the structure is not known during the formation of the
equilibrium and kinematic relationship.

Thus, the analysis proceeds in a step-by-step incremental manner, using the deformed geometry of the
structure obtained from an iterative cycles of the calculation (Iterative analysis).
The structure that are more sensitive to 2nd order effects are the structures with low flexural stiffness
and under high compressive force. If the axial force “P” acting vertically on the element is compressive
in nature and that is closer to the elastic buckling load “Pcr”, the P-delta effect becomes more significant
and prominent.

Fig-1

Also, in Staad, one can perform the PDelta Analysis directly by the consideration of the Geometric
Stiffness Matrix [KG].
Here, the stress stiffening effect due to the axial stress is considered directly to modify the
actual Stiffness Matrix [K].
Depending on the load “P” acting axially on the member, the lateral stiffness of the members starts
decreasing. So more the compressive force experienced by the member, lesser will be its lateral load
carrying capacity. This phenomena is known as Stress Softening effect which is the result of the change
in GEOMETRIC STIFFNESS of that member. In Staad, the change in the GEOMETRIC
STIFFNESS can be captured by invoking the KG option intended to modify the Stiffness
Matrix [K] to [K + KG].
So, by this approach the P-Delta stiffness equation is directly linearized by the [K + KG] matrix and
the solution can be obtained directly and exactly, without iteration.
Moreover, in addition to the above two methods of performing the PDelta Analysis, there is a simple
and approximate way to determine the result of second order effect is to simply magnify the result
reported from the first order analysis by the amplification factor 1/(1-P/Pcr), where Pcr is the elastic
buckling load of the concerned member. This approach is also known as Amplification Method.

In case of the heavy gravity loading or the flexible structure, the accuracy of capturing the actual P-
Delta effect falls and result thus obtained from the Amplification method becomes unreliable. In such
situation, performing the iterative P-delta analysis or the PDelta KG analysis is must to predict the
actual effect on the structure.

Following is a simple example of a cantilever column analyzed in Staad by the iterative analysis, where
the “Small delta” (δ) is ignored and is verified and compared with that of the Hand- Calculation upto 4
iteration cycles.

Hand-calculation and Verification of Large P-delta effect in a Cantilever column with that of
Staad result upto 4 iteration cycles.

Height, L = 10000 mm
E = 205000 N/mm2
I = 8.33 x106 mm4
Vertical Load, P =50000 N
Horizontal Load, H = 2000N

First Iteration
Now, M= HxL = 20 kNm
So, the lateral displacement (Δ1) at the column tip
Δ1 = (ML2)/(3EI) = 0.3902 m
Also, the vertical load P acting on displaced Δ1 column tip resulting in generation of the additional
moment M1 at the base.
M1 = P x Δ1 = 19.51 KNm
Now, the total moment “Mt1” at the base = (M+M1) = 39.51 KNm
The modified horizontal displacement “Δ2” undergone for the first modified moment Mt1
Δ2 = (Mt1L2)/ (3EI) = 0.770 m

Second Iteration
Also, the vertical load “P” acting on the newly displaced column tip (Δ2 - Δ1) resulting in the additional
moment M2 at the base
M2 = P x (Δ2 - Δ1) = 19.035 KNm
Now, the total moment at the base, Mt2 = (M+M1+M2) = (Mt1+M2) = 58.54 KNm
The second modified horizontal displacement Δ3 against the second modified Moment Mt2
Δ3 = (Mt2L2)/3EI = 1.14 m

Third Iteration
Similarly, following the iteration steps of 1 and 2
M3 = P x (Δ3 – Δ2) = 18.555 KNm
The total moment at the base, Mt3 = M+M1+M2+M3= 77.1 KNm
Δ4 = (Mt3L2)/3EI = 1.50 m

Fourth Iteration
M4 = P x (Δ4 – Δ3) = 18.15 KNm
The total moment at the base, Mt4 = M+M1+M2+M3= Mt3 + M4 =
Mt4 = 95.25
Δ5 = (Mt4L2)/3EI = 1.85 m
Fig-2