3 PLASTIC ANALYSIS E:\_pedro\711\New ENCE - 74 1\chp_3\T! WPD Template: PLN TPL Sect 1_awpd 3.1. COMPARISON OF ELASTIC AND PLASTIC ANALYSES CONDITIONS FOR CORRECT PLASTIC ANALYSIS 1, Mechanism: The limit load is reached when the correct mechanism forms. 2. Equilibrium: The sum of all forces and moments is equal to zero. 3. Plastic moment: The moment may nowhere exceed M,. CONDITIONS FOR CORRECT ELASTIC ANALYSIS 1. Cor uity: The deformations are proportional to the loads. 2. Equilibrium: The sum of ali forces and moments is equal to zero. 3. Yield moment: The moment may nowhere exceed M,.3.1 COMPARISON OF ELASTIC AND PLASTIC ANALYSES: Plastic Analysis Elastic Analysis Kee Mechanism ( pee Equilibrium Continuity | cam (PELL Yield My Darl, Less than My Fig. 3.1.1 Necessary Conditions for Correct Plastic and Elastic Analyses (Beedle 1958, p. 56)3.2 FUNDAMENTAL PRINCIPLES 1 EA_pedro\71 t\New ENCE - 711\chp_3\TEXT_3_2.WPD ‘Template; PLN TPL Sect 2_a.wpd 3.2. FUNDAMENTAL PRINCIPLES 3.2.4 VIRTUAL WORK If a system of forces in equilibrium is subjected to a virtual displacement, the work done by the external forces and internal moments vanishes. W,+W, = 0 The internal work is negative as the plastic moments rotate in a direction opposite to the plastic hinges. For convenience of solving for the limit load, the equation is written in the form: w, = |W) 3.2.2. ASSUMPTIONS Q_ Materiat behavior: The material is elastic-perfectly plastic. Smail deformations: The equilibrium equations can be written for the undeformed structure. Q_ No instability: The structure reaches the limit load without becoming unstable. Q Continuity: The connections can transmit the plastic moment, M, Q Axial and shear forces: ir effects on M, are neglected. Q Proportional toading: All loads applied on a structure are in fixed proportions to each other.3.2 FUNDAMENTAL PRINCIPLES 2 3.2.3 LOWER BOUND Theorem “If any stress distribution throughout the structure can be found which is everywhere in equilibrium internally and balances certain external loads and at the same time does not violate the yield condition, those loads will be carried safely by the structure.” (Calladine 1985, p. 96) “An external load in equilibrium with a distribution of bending moment which nowhere exceeds the fully plastic value is less than or equal to the collapse load. Such a distribution of bending moment is referred to as statically admissible.” (Chakrabarty 1987, p. 229) Proof The lower bound theorem can be proved in a manner similar to the proof of the upper bound theorem. (a) (c) Fig. 3.2.1 Illustration of Lower Bound Theorem (Beedle 1958, p. 50)3.2 FUNDAMENTAL PRINCIPLES 3 3.2.4 UPPER BOUND Theorem “If an estimate of the plastic collapse load of a body is made by equating internal rate of dissipation of energy to the rate at which external forces do work in any postulated mechanism of deformation of the body, the estimate will be either higher, or correct.” (Calladine 1985, p. 104) “The load obtained by the external work done by it to the internal work absorbed at the piastic hinges in any assumed collapse mechanism is greater than or equal to the collapse load. The deformation mode represented by a collapse mechanism is said to be kinematically admissible.” (Chakrabarty 1987, p. 229) Proof The limit load for the correct collapse mechanism of the given structure, designated by the subscript 1, is determined by equating the external work to the internal dissipation of energy: DP ty = YM, 9, 7 where P, ;— Set of external forces applied at locations f uy, mechanism displacements in directions of external forces at : locations i Mj = set of internal moments at plastic hinge locations j 8, J mechanism rotations in directions of internal moments at plastic hinge locations j Similarly, the limit load for any other geometrically possible mechanism, designated by the subscript 2, is determined from: YE Pei Hes = x Me 82 (Eq. 3.2.4) 7 where3.2 FUNDAMENTAL PRINCIPLES P,,,= set of extemal forces applied at locations f mechanism displacements in directions of external forces at locations i M, = set of internal moments at plastic hinge locations k mechanism rotations in directions of internal moments at plastic hinge locations k Now, let the set of equilibrium forces P, , and internal moments M, , from the correct mechanism 1 undergo the displacements u, , and rotations @, , from any other mechanism: EPH, = My 85 (Eq. 3.2.5) Subtracting Eq. 3.2.5 from Eq. 3.2.4 gives Y Poy Palas = (Mag My) O24 (Eq. 3.2.6) At the plastic hinges of the second mechanism, the moments are My =M, Since the first mechanism may not have hinges at the same locations as those of the second mechanism, the moments of the first mechanism at the locations of the plastic hinges of the second mechanism are M, ;=M,,. Therefore, the right side of Eq. 3.2.6 is always greater than or equal to zero. Accordingly, the left side must aiso be greater than or equal to zero, meaning that Pog > Pay Or, in other. ‘ds, the correct mechanism is the one that gives the lowest all limit load values.3.2 FUNDAMENTAL PRINCIPLES Fig. 3.2.2 Illustration of Upper Bound Theorem (Beedle 1958, p. 59) 3.2.5 COROLLARIES OF THE BOUND THEOREMS “The two limit theorems can be combined to form a uniqueness theorem which states that if any statically admissible distribution of bending moment can be found in a structure that has sufficient number of yield hinges to produce a mechanism, the corresponding load is equal to the collapse load.” (Chakrabarty 1987, p. 229) “If in a body we are in position to investigate all possible distributions of stress which are in equilibrium and do not violate the yield condition, the highest lower- bound load discovered must be equal to the collapse load.” (Calladine 1985, p. 110) “Addition of material to a (weightless) structure without any change in the position of the applied loads cannot result in a lower collapse load. The removal of material cannot strengthen it.” (Calladine 1985, p. 110)3.2 FUNDAMENTAL PRINCIPLES 6 “Increasing (decreasing) the yield strength of the material cannot weaken (strengthen) it.” (Calladine 1985, p. 111) The bound theorems are valid only if the material is elastic-perfectly plastic. In a possible parallel idea in elasticity theory, it would be false to say that “addition of material will always decrease stress concentration.” 3.2.6 SUMMARY If the correct mechanism is selected, the moment does not exceed M, anywhere, the solution is exact, and the conditions of plastic analysis are satisfied. If an incorrect mechanism is assumed, the moment exceeds M,, somewhere, the solution is an upper bound, and the plastic moment condition is not satisfied. Example | 2P. 3P. pti ty For this structure and loading, the panel mechanism gives the correct limit load P,, = 4-8 pee gate3.2 FUNDAMENTAL PRINCIPLES: M, Mp The combined mechanism gives a limit load greater than the correct limit toad from the panel mechanism and, as a result, the moment at the left beam-to- column connection exceeds the plastic moment: M; M; Dividing the moment diagram by 3/2 would satisfy the plastic moment condition but violate the mechanism condition.3.2 FUNDAMENTAL PRINCIPLES: aw (No mechanism) Since a mechanism has not formed, the limit load corresponding to the reduced bending moment diagram becomes a lower bound: P. = Fz 1 Me ep i a3.3 STATICAL METHOD OF ANALYSIS E:\_pedro\71 1\New ENCE - 711\chp_3\TEXT_3_3.WPD Template: PLN TPL Sect 2_a.wod 3.3 3.3.4 STATICAL METHOD OF ANALYSIS APPROACH The objective is to find an equilibrium moment diagram in which M a A redundant moment Tin PT Applied loads: YP ta Moment diagram due to applied loads: Composite moment diagram: From moment equilibrium: M, PL oy Ae Pp, = 4 2 Mechanism: Fig. 3.3.1 Plastic Analysis of Two-Span Continuous Beam, Statical Method (Beedle 1958, p. 64)3.3 STATICAL METHOD OF ANALYSIS 3.3.3 EXAMPLE 2: BEAM FIXED AT ONE END, SUPPORTED AT OTHER Pp P 1 to ts 4 Will us Structure: WHS u3 us Redundant Ge edundants: Peer eeeet 4 Moment diagram due to redundant moment: Applied loads: Moment diagram due to applied loads Composite moment diagram: Q_ Hinges form at 1 and 3: Pol, Mey, Ay, - pg Meg Pye 4M, ate Mp Q > Hinges form at 1 and 2: violates plastic moment, M,>M,, Q> Hinges form at 2 and 3: violates equilibrium condition. Mechanism:3.4 MECHANISM METHOD OF ANALYSIS 1 3.4 MECHANISM METHOD OF ANALYSIS 3.4.1 APPROACH Find a mechanism (independent or composite) as follows: 4. Determine all locations where plastic hinges could form (load points, connections, points of zero shear in a prismatic beam loaded uniformly). 2. Determine all independent and composite mechanisms. 3. Calculate the limit load for each mechanism with the virtual work method. 4. Select the mechanism that gives the lowest limit load and verify that the plastic moment condition is satisfied at all sections, M = M,. Suppose there are WN critical sections at which plastic hinges may form under a given loading system, and let x denote the number of redundants. Since the bending moments at the critical sections would be completely determined if the values of these redundants were known, there must be N - x independent relations connecting the N critical moments. Each of these relations is an equation of statical equilibrium that can be associated with a possible independent mechanisms through the virtual work principle. It follows, therefore, that the number of possible independent mechanisms, from which all other mechanisms of collapse can be deduced is n=N-x where number of possible independent mechanisms number of possible plastic hinges n N Be number of redundants Total number of independent and combined mechanisms: Noon = 5 tt! = 2 AUARI) , BU MOB) gs hg mech “£4 k(n KE 1-2 12-3 where n= number of independent mechanisms3.4 MECHANISM METHOD OF ANALYSIS k == counter 3.4.2 TYPES OF MECHANISMS. For convenience in referring to different modes of failure, the various types of mechanisms are illustrated in FIG. 3.4.1, using the structure shown in sketch (a): Beam mechanism Sketch (b) Four examples are given here of the displacement of single spans under load Panel mechanism Sketch (c) This motion is due to side-sway Gable mechanism Sketch (d) This is a characteristic mechanism of gabled frames, invoiving spreading of the column tops with respect to the bases. Joint mechanism Sketch (e) This independent mechanism forms at the junction of three or more members and represents motion under the action of an applied moment. Composite mechanism Sketches (f), (g) Independent mechanisms may be combined in different ways. A composite mechanism may be "partial” as indicated by sketch (f) and for which the frame is stil) indeterminate at failure; or it may be a "complete" composite mechanism, in which case the frame is determinate at failure.3.4 MECHANISM METHOD OF ANALYSIS Bear mechanisms (o) me SS Independent | a tw y Panel mechanism (a) Gable mechanism o Sas o portal mechanism compte anette (ey Complete mechanism FIG. 3.4.1. Types of Mechanism (Beedle 1958, p. 73)3.4 MECHANISM METHOD OF ANALYSIS 3.4.3 EXAMPLE 1: TWO-SPAN CONTINUOUS BEAM @ Mechanism 2 FIG. 3.4.2. Unsymmetrical Two-Span Continuous Beam (Beedle 1958, p. 67)3.4 MECHANISM METHOD OF ANALYSIS. Number of Independent Mechanisms n=N-x=4-2=2 First Beam Mechanism w, - P-03 - 3erp 8 8 W, = M, (20 +0) = 30M, From W, = W; 8M. P,.= —* fee Second Beam Mechanism w, = 2P-04 - 2eLp 3 3 3M, 3M. W, = M8 + p 38 M8 _ gam yBaer aie ee From We = W; 6M PL= ae Controls Combined Mechanism3.4 MECHANISM METHOD OF ANALYSIS 6 The virtual rotations n@ and @ are arbitrary. One is not a function of the other. 3L Pono= = M,(2n8 +8) 3M, 2p-e4 = m,a+—2| 38 3 e 2a Add the above equations: 3,2 LP|3n+2]| -m(3n+4 [Sr-5] - mtn and solve for the limit load: _ 24(3n+4) M, P. 9n+16 L M, i Forn =: P,=8 a + First beam mechanism M : Forn=0: P,=6 oe Second beam mechanism Combinations of the two mechanisms yield limit loads of 6M,JL < PL < 8M,/L for 0 M, Bounds on exact solution : mM, P, < 3.16" L 3.16 M,/L M, P,> 2 - 3.06" 1.034 L Exact solution (page 3.4-19): M, PL = 3.43%3.4 MECHANISM METHOD OF ANALYSIS 25 3.4.9 EXAMPLE 7: TWO-BAY FRAME — COMBINATION OF MECHANISMS : y r z 7 | M, = CONSTANT aL 2 Number of independent mechanisms: n=N-x=10-6=4 Number of independent and combined mechanisms: Neen = 2° ~4 = 15 Independent Mechanisms (4) Beam mechanism 1: OL Out P-OL = M,-48 4M, L 20 P. (2) Beam mechanism 2.3.4 MECHANISM METHOD OF ANALYSIS (Most critical) (3) Panel mechanism: 20L Seems : lo ° @ a (4) Joint mechanism: Dor 2P@L = M48 2M, PL = 2 P-20L = M,-68 3M, Pieter. eee: w, = 0 W, = 30M,3.4 MECHANISM METHOD OF ANALYSIS a Combined Mechanisms (5) Mechanisms 1 and 2 (no physicat meaning ee P@L=4M,0 2: 2POL-4M,6 142: 3POL -8M,9 M : Py = 267-2 L (6) Mechanisms 1 and 3: dee PelL-4M,8 3: 2P6L-6M,6 1: -M,® “3: -M,8 3P6L = 8M,8 M, P, = 2.672 L (7) Mechanisms 1 and 4:3.4 MECHANISM METHOD OF ANALYSIS (8) Mechanisms 2 and 3: (9) Mechanisms 2 and 4 (10) Mechanisms 3 and 4 2D (11) Mechanisms 1, 2 and 3: nN 2POL = 2POL = 4POL - 2PO0L = 6M, 6 3M,8 -M,8 -M,8 7M, 3.523.4 MECHANISM METHOD OF ANALYSIS ee POL = 2: 2P0L 3: 2POL 5POL (12) Mechanisms 1, 2 and 4: 293.4 MECHANISM METHOD OF ANALYSIS Doe (13) Mechanisms 1, 3 and 4: CG (Ty 303.4 MECHANISM METHOD OF ANALYSIS. (14) Mechanisms 2, 3 and 4: — (Third most critical) (15) Mechanisms 1, 2, 3 and 4: D (Second most critical) 1,2 and 3: 4: -1, -3 POL 2PeL 3POL 2P6L 2PeL 4POL3.4 MECHANISM METHOD OF ANALYSIS 323.5 MEMBERS OF NONUNIFORM CROSS SECTION 3.5 MEMBERS OF NONUNIFORM CROSS SECTION 3.5.1 TAPERED MEMBER (a) Determinate | moment | ® Redundant ‘moment | Compasite moment diagram Plastic hinge position ‘Maximum moment (hear zero) Soa" «@ FIG. 3.5.1. Plastic Analysis of Tapered Member (Beedle 1958, p. 97) In tapered and uniformly loaded members, the hinge in the positive moment region does not form where the moment is maximum (zero shear). Instead, it3.8 MEMBERS OF NONUNIFORM CROSS SECTION forms where the bending moment diagram induced by the applied loads and the diagram of plastic moment capacity have the same slopes and ordinates Bending Moment Diagram Eliminate V, and solve for M,: _| LM, 23.5 MEMBERS OF NONUNIFORM GROSS SECTION, Plastic Moment Capacity My = *Z,9, where the plastic modulus for a tapered beam with a wide flange sect’ 4 is Z, = byt,|d, x t, x a apes ~d,) -t | fe “7 ~d,) - Limit Load The plastic hinge position x and the limit load w, are obtained by equating the slopes and ordinates of the bending moment diagram and the diagram of plastic moment capacity: dM, _ dM,, dx dx M, = M, x px3.5 MEMBERS OF NONUNIFORM CROSS SECTION 3.5.2 COVERPLATED AND HAUNCHED MEMBERS (a) oe aE +0 FIG. 3.5.2. Plastic Analysis of Members with Prismatic Cross Section in Positive Moment Region (Beedle 1958, p. 94) In contrast to tapered members, coverpiated and haunched members are typically prismatic along the positive bending moment region where the diagram of plastic moment capacity has a zero slope aM. 4 dx3.5 MEMBERS OF NONUNIFORM CROSS SECTION and constant ordinate M,, = Zo, = constant where the plastic modulus for a prismatic beam with @ wide flange section is t, Z = b;t,(d-t,) + 4 (d-2t)? Limit Load The plastic hinge position x and the limit load w, are, again, obtained by equating the slopes and ordinates of the bending moment diagram and the diagram of plastic moment capacity: dM, w,L M,,-M, x MT, Apr? wx = 0 dx 2 L we My ~ Myo . 2 L3.6 TESTS OF CONTINUOUS STRUCTURES. 3.6 TESTS OF CONTINUOUS STRUCTURES 3.6.1 RECAPITULATION OF ASSUMPTIONS @® Doetity © Plovie moment @ Plastic hinge ae ) cpr “+ soment capacity = Mf, © Redintibotion of moment h A @ Ultimete toad: mechanism FIG, 3.6.1. Important Assumptions in Plastic Analysis (Beedle 1958, p. 99) 3.6.2 STRENGTH OF CONTINUOUS BEAMS3.8 TESTS OF CONTINUOUS STRUCTURES STRUCTURE AND SHAPE REFER! ‘% OF Loanins EFERENCE pREDICTED Pp 2040 100 ‘Observed |[restn, Lood = 2 awa4o 51 ‘Computed Elastic a is bet! aw4o | ew4o0 Sa beet} swso 5 peti ewes $5 geht, eras 220 pitt eri2.s (L22 = pir, eras? (122 et pet ewses 96.6 (on sea 2248310" *(Germon St. 37 Steel.37 Steel) FIG. 3.6.2. Summary of Test Results for Continuous Beams Showing Correlation with Predictions of Plastic Theory (Plastic Design 1971, p. 50)3.6 TESTS OF CONTINUOUS STRUCTURES. STRUCTURE AND peek ns SHAPE REFERENCE prenicten P, 20 60_100 ee sro ptt cies p= BLIO ae 4urT pete sti. pares S5I10 BBi3 [asi] i lowes [aaai] = 12B19 [as72(65)] ett nas fas72(esi] Scale 22 4 6 8H. 5.9 59 5.9 5.9 59 5.9 5.9 48 4.8 5.6 5.6 FIG. 3.6.3. Summary of Test Results for Beams Showing Correlation with Predictions of Plastic Theory (Plastic Design 1971, p.61)3.6 TESTS OF CONTINUOUS STRUCTURES, 3.6.3 STRENGTH OF RIGID FRAMES STRUCTURE AND "OF pte SHAPE REFERENCE prenicteD Py 20 60 100 ‘Observed Maximum, Loag aw40 5. ‘Computed Elastic Limit eBIs 5.1 oP 2 7 lewe36 5.12 =. a jt l2w36 5.12 [ae 12w36 8.12 mm (2036 5.5 ozseaion Seale FIG. 3.6.4. Summary of Test Results for Frames Showing Correlation with Predictions of Plastic Theory (Plastic Design 1971, p. 54)3.6 TESTS OF CONTINUOUS STRUCTURES. STRUCTURE AND % OF Loaoine inci! REFERENCE preDicTED Pp 20 60 190 ‘Observed Maximum Loo 513 }~-Computed Elastic Limit 5130 oo aBI3, 5.14 —s 4B13 i =a (two tests) ac 4815 — (two tests) 5.4 Sa 48I3 | 2466 0M amma) Seale FIG. 3.6.5, Summary of Test Results for Frames Showing Correlation with Predictions of Plastic Theory (Plastic Design 1971, p. 55)for3.6 TESTS OF CONTINUOUS STRUCTURES STRUCTURE AND LOADING oneee: ° @x4xl6ib. RSJ (two frames tested in parattel) - B8x4xlGlb. RSu I (two frames tested in parailel) two tests ab ot ate £ Sx3xilib RSU (two frames tested’ in parallel) a oh ty e ‘Sx3uil (6, RSW (two frames tested in parallel) Py MIB13 tore Het70%0r8 7x4xI6 Ib, RSI (two frames tested in porallel) ‘Seale 928 515 515 5.16 5.16 SIT % OF REFERENCE pREDICTED Pp 20 60 100 ‘Observed, Maximum Load mputed Elostic Limit FIG. 3.6.6. Summary of Test Results for Frames Showing Correlation with Predictions of Plastic Theory (Plastic Design 1971, p. 56)2.8 TESTS OF CONTINUOUS STRUCTURES: STRUCTURE AND LOADING enene ewir law36 2p pp ae Ppt co swies (aaai) Beam 0125.4 (36) - J eo Col. 43410 1b, ° (BS15) Beam S'x3%xH 1b. J (B.S. 15) 33"x 8.5 Ih, (BS.15) gzaceion, Scale 4 REFERENCE 5.14 5.18 5.19 5.20 5.21 % OF PREDICTED Pp ere [7 T oeserves Maximum Load ‘Computed Elastic Limit Clad Frame nm FIG, 3.6.7. Summary of Test Results for Frames Showing Correlation with Predictions of Plastic Theary (Plastic Design 1971, p. 57)3.6 TESTS OF CONTINUOUS STRUCTURES STRUCTURE AND Cape SHAPE dee de ip int, Col, 6W25 Ext, Col, 64°20 Beam 12816.5 Ant, Col. 6WF25, Ext. Col, 6W20 Beam 128 16.5 be he Int. Col. 6W'25 rae [e ft] ext. col.ew20 + Beam 12816.5 Int. Col. WES Ext. Col. 6W°20 Beam I2B16.5 Seale $—!2-—#2 2?" % OF REFERENCE preicten py 5.10 510 5.10 5.10 20 60100. ‘Observed Maximum Load }~Computed Elastic Limit FIG. 3.6.8. Summary of Test Results for Braced Frames Showing Correlation with Predictions of Plastic Theory (Plastic Design 1971, p. 58)